How To Mount A SCSI Hard Drive in Fedora Core 2
Hello,
I performed a clean install of Fedora Core 2 on a machine with a SCSI drive (intended to be the primary drive) and a Serial ATA drive. The SCSI drive is recognized by the computer, in CMOS and in the SCSI controller utility, and this drive has been verified and (low-level) formatted. It has not been partitioned, as I had planned (naively?) to partition it either automatically or with the Disk Druid during the installation of FC2. However, only the Serial ATA was detected -- as sda.
So I went ahead and installed FC2 on the Serial ATA drive, figuring that if it were a kernel issue, it might be fixed with an update.
I installed all the updates, including the kernel. Now the kernel is 2.6.7-1.494.2.2 (versus the 2.6.5-1.358 from the FC2 CDs).
I am not sure what to do next. Is the SCSI drive detected (by Fedora) now? If so, how do I know this, and if not, what do I need to do to detect it? What is the best tool to partition the drive? And then what entries to I need to create (in /etc/fstab and/or elsewhere) so that it will be properly mounted?
Here is some information that may be helpful to you, the helpful experts:
$ cat /proc/scsi/scsi
Attached devices:
Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00
Vendor: ATA Model: HDS722512VLSA80 Rev: V33O
Type: Direct-Access
$ dmesg | grep scsi
scsi0 : ata_piix
scsi1 : ata_piix
Attached scsi disk sda at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0
$ dmesg | grep sda
SCSI device sda: 241254720 512-byte hdwr sectors (123522 MB)
SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back
sda: sda1 sda2 sda3
Attached scsi disk sda at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
EXT3 FS on sda2, internal journal
Adding 2040244k swap on /dev/sda3. Priority:-1 extents:1
EXT3 FS on sda1, internal journal
$ dmesg | grep SCSI
SCSI subsystem initialized
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05
SCSI device sda: 241254720 512-byte hdwr sectors (123522 MB)
SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back
----------
Note that "Model: HDS722512VLSA80" is the Serial ATA drive, not a SCSI drive.
Finally, since the SCSI drive will contain the most frequently accessed data (MySQL databases, etc.) would it be better to retain the installation of FC2 on the Serial ATA drive, or reinstall it on the SCSI drive?
Thanks in advance,
s1m0ne
I performed a clean install of Fedora Core 2 on a machine with a SCSI drive (intended to be the primary drive) and a Serial ATA drive. The SCSI drive is recognized by the computer, in CMOS and in the SCSI controller utility, and this drive has been verified and (low-level) formatted. It has not been partitioned, as I had planned (naively?) to partition it either automatically or with the Disk Druid during the installation of FC2. However, only the Serial ATA was detected -- as sda.
So I went ahead and installed FC2 on the Serial ATA drive, figuring that if it were a kernel issue, it might be fixed with an update.
I installed all the updates, including the kernel. Now the kernel is 2.6.7-1.494.2.2 (versus the 2.6.5-1.358 from the FC2 CDs).
I am not sure what to do next. Is the SCSI drive detected (by Fedora) now? If so, how do I know this, and if not, what do I need to do to detect it? What is the best tool to partition the drive? And then what entries to I need to create (in /etc/fstab and/or elsewhere) so that it will be properly mounted?
Here is some information that may be helpful to you, the helpful experts:
$ cat /proc/scsi/scsi
Attached devices:
Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00
Vendor: ATA Model: HDS722512VLSA80 Rev: V33O
Type: Direct-Access
$ dmesg | grep scsi
scsi0 : ata_piix
scsi1 : ata_piix
Attached scsi disk sda at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0
$ dmesg | grep sda
SCSI device sda: 241254720 512-byte hdwr sectors (123522 MB)
SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back
sda: sda1 sda2 sda3
Attached scsi disk sda at scsi1, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
EXT3 FS on sda2, internal journal
Adding 2040244k swap on /dev/sda3. Priority:-1 extents:1
EXT3 FS on sda1, internal journal
$ dmesg | grep SCSI
SCSI subsystem initialized
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05
SCSI device sda: 241254720 512-byte hdwr sectors (123522 MB)
SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back
----------
Note that "Model: HDS722512VLSA80" is the Serial ATA drive, not a SCSI drive.
Finally, since the SCSI drive will contain the most frequently accessed data (MySQL databases, etc.) would it be better to retain the installation of FC2 on the Serial ATA drive, or reinstall it on the SCSI drive?
Thanks in advance,
s1m0ne
CC Anonymouslemming, we need rather specific information about your SCSI controller to be able to tell if it is supported (if it is, it would be rather simple to test/configure it).
-- Glenn
-- Glenn
If you don't know, we could perhaps "parse" something from "lspci -v" (or "lspci -vv").
-- Glenn
-- Glenn
ASKER
The Serial ATA drive is /dev/sda. My (limited and apparently incorrect) understanding was that sda, sdb, etc. were for SCSI drives, and hda, hdb, etc. were for IDE drives. But Serial ATA is not SCSI, so why is it sda?
$ df -hT
Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda2 ext3 112G 6.5G 100G 7% /
/dev/sda1 ext3 99M 12M 83M 12% /boot
none tmpfs 498M 0 498M 0% /dev/shm
SCSI controller is KW-910UW.
$ lspci -vv
01:00.0 SCSI storage controller: Initio Corporation 360P (rev 02)
Subsystem: Unknown device 9292:0202
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66Mhz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 32, Cache Line Size 10
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 10
Region 0: I/O ports at b800 [size=ff8e0000]
Region 1: Memory at ff8ff000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
Expansion ROM at 00008000 [disabled]
$ df -hT
Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda2 ext3 112G 6.5G 100G 7% /
/dev/sda1 ext3 99M 12M 83M 12% /boot
none tmpfs 498M 0 498M 0% /dev/shm
SCSI controller is KW-910UW.
$ lspci -vv
01:00.0 SCSI storage controller: Initio Corporation 360P (rev 02)
Subsystem: Unknown device 9292:0202
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B-
Status: Cap- 66Mhz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 32, Cache Line Size 10
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 10
Region 0: I/O ports at b800 [size=ff8e0000]
Region 1: Memory at ff8ff000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
Expansion ROM at 00008000 [disabled]
> The Serial ATA drive is /dev/sda. My (limited and apparently incorrect) understanding was that sda, sdb, etc. were for SCSI drives, and hda, hdb, etc. were for IDE
> drives. But Serial ATA is not SCSI, so why is it sda?
Driver dependant. Probably someone thought it'd fit better in the SCSI subsustem category... So all the sata drivers (for the controllers) _are_ in the SCSI "category".
> 01:00.0 SCSI storage controller: Initio Corporation 360P (rev 02)
According to http://www.linuxquestions.org/hcl/showproduct.php?product=50 things might not look up for that particular controller with a 2.6 kernel... Checking shows that there's no initio kernel module (at least not in the 2.6 kernels I've got near me).
Is that an old card? ... Yes, the IDs (9292:0202) suggest it's fairly old...
Seems to me that the best solution for that old card would be early retirement. Looking at the inition site (http://www.inition.com) you only have slightly "prehestoric" drivers... So you should perhaps look for a supported SCSI card, or... if you're spending money anyway, go for another SATA drive;-).
-- Glenn
> drives. But Serial ATA is not SCSI, so why is it sda?
Driver dependant. Probably someone thought it'd fit better in the SCSI subsustem category... So all the sata drivers (for the controllers) _are_ in the SCSI "category".
> 01:00.0 SCSI storage controller: Initio Corporation 360P (rev 02)
According to http://www.linuxquestions.org/hcl/showproduct.php?product=50 things might not look up for that particular controller with a 2.6 kernel... Checking shows that there's no initio kernel module (at least not in the 2.6 kernels I've got near me).
Is that an old card? ... Yes, the IDs (9292:0202) suggest it's fairly old...
Seems to me that the best solution for that old card would be early retirement. Looking at the inition site (http://www.inition.com) you only have slightly "prehestoric" drivers... So you should perhaps look for a supported SCSI card, or... if you're spending money anyway, go for another SATA drive;-).
-- Glenn
ASKER
Glenn,
As it turns out, the card is an old model, though it is "new" to us. (The analogy is if an auto dealership were to sell a late-90s model car as new just because it had never been driven.) The linux drivers support "RedHat 4.0 or above" which, not surprisingly, did not compile on FC2. How are the IDs (9292:0202) translated into a date or age of the device?
If, as now seems likely, the card needs to be replaced, could you recommend one or several basic (i.e. not too pricey) SCSI controllers, that are known to be reliable and are supported by the 2.6 kernel?
Is it the kernel, not the specific distribution of Linux, that is the issue?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
As it turns out, the card is an old model, though it is "new" to us. (The analogy is if an auto dealership were to sell a late-90s model car as new just because it had never been driven.) The linux drivers support "RedHat 4.0 or above" which, not surprisingly, did not compile on FC2. How are the IDs (9292:0202) translated into a date or age of the device?
If, as now seems likely, the card needs to be replaced, could you recommend one or several basic (i.e. not too pricey) SCSI controllers, that are known to be reliable and are supported by the 2.6 kernel?
Is it the kernel, not the specific distribution of Linux, that is the issue?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
Oh, I did a google search on 'em... you read 'em as "vendor:chip/card" (OID standard maintained by IEEE IIRC:). Then did some guessing from the links I found;-).
It's been quite some time since RH4.0 was modern, so the driver resuts (driver for a 1.x kernel perhaps?) isn't at all surprising. As you guess, it is the kernels lack of driver (or the other way around, depending on how one sees it:-) that is the problem, so switching to another distribution that also use the 2.6 kernel will not help.
Continuing the cardealer analogy: If I were you, I'd demand my money back, or another new (2004 model == supported:-) car(d;-) in exchange, or else... returning the hunk of junk through their window:-):-).
Did you ask for a card supported by linux?
There are very many SCSI chips/cards supported... do
ls /lib/modules/2.6*/kernel/d
... and you'll get a listing of most modules/drivers... As one can see there is one initio "survivor" in the in2000 module, and (shockingly:) even the older advansys ... You'll also see the sata modules there
As to recommendations... Anything PCI from Adaptec is usually OK with the aic7xxx drivers (the aha1* drivers are for ISA cards... who would wan't to use ISA today?-), and the NCR/Symbian/LSI Logic (same products/company restructured/sold some times:-) have also been kind to me, but I'm sure many others would be OK to. Specifically cheaper cards _should_ work too, but I have very limited->no experience with 'em.
HtH
-- Glenn
It's been quite some time since RH4.0 was modern, so the driver resuts (driver for a 1.x kernel perhaps?) isn't at all surprising. As you guess, it is the kernels lack of driver (or the other way around, depending on how one sees it:-) that is the problem, so switching to another distribution that also use the 2.6 kernel will not help.
Continuing the cardealer analogy: If I were you, I'd demand my money back, or another new (2004 model == supported:-) car(d;-) in exchange, or else... returning the hunk of junk through their window:-):-).
Did you ask for a card supported by linux?
There are very many SCSI chips/cards supported... do
ls /lib/modules/2.6*/kernel/d
... and you'll get a listing of most modules/drivers... As one can see there is one initio "survivor" in the in2000 module, and (shockingly:) even the older advansys ... You'll also see the sata modules there
As to recommendations... Anything PCI from Adaptec is usually OK with the aic7xxx drivers (the aha1* drivers are for ISA cards... who would wan't to use ISA today?-), and the NCR/Symbian/LSI Logic (same products/company restructured/sold some times:-) have also been kind to me, but I'm sure many others would be OK to. Specifically cheaper cards _should_ work too, but I have very limited->no experience with 'em.
HtH
-- Glenn
ASKER
Glenn,
How much should I expect to pay for a SCSI controller, considering that I do not need RAID, and I will probably not need to support multiple SCSI devices?
The KW-910UW was just under $100, but most of the other 68-pin cards I am finding are well over $200 (more than the cost of the drive itself).
One exception: Lsi U160 Ultra160 SCSI Card Single 64Bit/33MHZ LVD/SE (Bare card)
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/viewspec.hmx?scriteria=AA22885
Should I even consider such a cheap card?
Does it look like it will work with FC2?
"System Requirements: Support for Windows and Linux based operating systems with SDMS software"
LSI Logic's web site states:
----------
2.5.X Kernels:
===========
The ncr53c8xx and sym53c8xx drivers are obsolete and will
be removed from the 2.5 kernel tree. The sym53c8xx_2 driver
must be used. The sym53c8xx_2 driver is bundled.
----------
(This should hold for the 2.6 kernel as well, since 2.5 is just a test version of 2.6, right?)
When I look in
/lib/modules/2.6.7-1.494.2
I find a directory, sym53c8xx_2, but the (only) contents of that directory is sym53c8xx.ko, which looks just like obsolete/unsupported driver. What am I missing?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
How much should I expect to pay for a SCSI controller, considering that I do not need RAID, and I will probably not need to support multiple SCSI devices?
The KW-910UW was just under $100, but most of the other 68-pin cards I am finding are well over $200 (more than the cost of the drive itself).
One exception: Lsi U160 Ultra160 SCSI Card Single 64Bit/33MHZ LVD/SE (Bare card)
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/viewspec.hmx?scriteria=AA22885
Should I even consider such a cheap card?
Does it look like it will work with FC2?
"System Requirements: Support for Windows and Linux based operating systems with SDMS software"
LSI Logic's web site states:
----------
2.5.X Kernels:
===========
The ncr53c8xx and sym53c8xx drivers are obsolete and will
be removed from the 2.5 kernel tree. The sym53c8xx_2 driver
must be used. The sym53c8xx_2 driver is bundled.
----------
(This should hold for the 2.6 kernel as well, since 2.5 is just a test version of 2.6, right?)
When I look in
/lib/modules/2.6.7-1.494.2
I find a directory, sym53c8xx_2, but the (only) contents of that directory is sym53c8xx.ko, which looks just like obsolete/unsupported driver. What am I missing?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
> How much should I expect to pay for a SCSI controller, considering that I do not need RAID, and I will probably not need
> to support multiple SCSI devices?
Below $100 seems reasonable.
But SCSI cards seldom are "massmarket", so finding a good card below $100 might be hard. Usually means you get ... "last years model":-).
> One exception: Lsi U160 Ultra160 SCSI Card Single 64Bit/33MHZ LVD/SE (Bare card)
Looks nice, especially the pricetag:-).
> Should I even consider such a cheap card?
Well, why not? It's bound to be better than the inotio one;-).
But take care to see that it'll work with your drive... Is the drive LVD?
As for the support... This is supported in the freeware driver, and (as groudier says) the older driveers are simply removed in the 2.5 (testing kernels that hence became 2.6) series... So the only driver, and the right driver is the one you see there.
-- Glenn
> to support multiple SCSI devices?
Below $100 seems reasonable.
But SCSI cards seldom are "massmarket", so finding a good card below $100 might be hard. Usually means you get ... "last years model":-).
> One exception: Lsi U160 Ultra160 SCSI Card Single 64Bit/33MHZ LVD/SE (Bare card)
Looks nice, especially the pricetag:-).
> Should I even consider such a cheap card?
Well, why not? It's bound to be better than the inotio one;-).
But take care to see that it'll work with your drive... Is the drive LVD?
As for the support... This is supported in the freeware driver, and (as groudier says) the older driveers are simply removed in the 2.5 (testing kernels that hence became 2.6) series... So the only driver, and the right driver is the one you see there.
-- Glenn
ASKER
Glenn,
Good catch regarding LVD.
The drive is this Seagate Cheetah: http://seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/marketing/detail/0,1081,619,00.html
I see no indication of its being LVD, although if there is alternate/equivalent terminology, I would almost certainly miss it.
I have almost settled on the Adaptec AHA-2940UW, which is in the $100 range. It seems also to be "last year's model" but popular enough to be supported. I spoke to tech. support at Vision, an Adaptec distributor, and I was told that the card should work with kernel 2.6. Specifically, it uses the aic7xxx drivers. (Which, thanks to your help, actually means something to me now.)
That's all I need to know, right? (Aside from the fact that the card will work with my drive, which I have already confirmed.)
Thanks,
s1m0ne
Good catch regarding LVD.
The drive is this Seagate Cheetah: http://seagate.com/cda/products/discsales/marketing/detail/0,1081,619,00.html
I see no indication of its being LVD, although if there is alternate/equivalent terminology, I would almost certainly miss it.
I have almost settled on the Adaptec AHA-2940UW, which is in the $100 range. It seems also to be "last year's model" but popular enough to be supported. I spoke to tech. support at Vision, an Adaptec distributor, and I was told that the card should work with kernel 2.6. Specifically, it uses the aic7xxx drivers. (Which, thanks to your help, actually means something to me now.)
That's all I need to know, right? (Aside from the fact that the card will work with my drive, which I have already confirmed.)
Thanks,
s1m0ne
ASKER
OK, the Adaptec AHA-2940UW controller is installed and the SCSI drive has been reformatted (from the controller's SCSI utility).
So back to the original question: How do I get the drive to be properly configured and mounted?
$ lspci -vv
01:00.0 SCSI storage controller: Adaptec AHA-2940U/UW/D / AIC-7881U (rev 01)
Subsystem: Adaptec AHA-2940UW SCSI Host Adapter
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV+ VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66Mhz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 32 (2000ns min, 2000ns max), Cache Line Size 10
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 10
Region 0: I/O ports at b800 [size=ff8e0000]
Region 1: Memory at ff8ff000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
Expansion ROM at 00010000 [disabled]
Capabilities: <available only to root>
Thanks,
s1m0ne
So back to the original question: How do I get the drive to be properly configured and mounted?
$ lspci -vv
01:00.0 SCSI storage controller: Adaptec AHA-2940U/UW/D / AIC-7881U (rev 01)
Subsystem: Adaptec AHA-2940UW SCSI Host Adapter
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV+ VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66Mhz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 32 (2000ns min, 2000ns max), Cache Line Size 10
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 10
Region 0: I/O ports at b800 [size=ff8e0000]
Region 1: Memory at ff8ff000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
Expansion ROM at 00010000 [disabled]
Capabilities: <available only to root>
Thanks,
s1m0ne
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
ASKER
Glenn,
Thanks a lot!
Almost there.
"modprobe aic7xxx" was the missing piece.
All I need now (I hope) is to make the modprobe operation permanent (as it is, it doesn't survive a reboot).
How do I do this?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
Thanks a lot!
Almost there.
"modprobe aic7xxx" was the missing piece.
All I need now (I hope) is to make the modprobe operation permanent (as it is, it doesn't survive a reboot).
How do I do this?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
You add an entry to your /etc/modprobe.conf file for it (assuming 2.6 kernel here:)... Something like
alias scsi_hostadapter aic7xxx
... It could be some "install blahblah..." thing too, but you should get by with just the alias.
And that (as they say) should be it!
If you decide to install to this driver later on, the installer will set this up (and the correct initrd image... (==the place where it keeps kernel modules that you need to find the modules... "Semimagic":-):-)
Best Regards
-- Glenn
alias scsi_hostadapter aic7xxx
... It could be some "install blahblah..." thing too, but you should get by with just the alias.
And that (as they say) should be it!
If you decide to install to this driver later on, the installer will set this up (and the correct initrd image... (==the place where it keeps kernel modules that you need to find the modules... "Semimagic":-):-)
Best Regards
-- Glenn
ASKER
Glenn,
$ cat modprobe.conf
alias eth0 e100
alias scsi_hostadapter ata_piix
alias snd-card-0 snd-intel8x0
install snd-intel8x0 /sbin/modprobe --ignore-install snd-intel8x0 && /usr/sbin/alsactl restore >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
remove snd-intel8x0 { /usr/sbin/alsactl store >/dev/null 2>&1 || : ; }; /sbin/modprobe -r --ignore-remove snd-intel8x0
alias usb-controller ehci-hcd
alias usb-controller1 uhci-hcd
alias scsi_hostadapter1 aic7xxx
This is without having made any changes. (The modprobe.conf dates back to Oct 5, when the card was installed, so the system must have added that line automatically.)
So it looks like I may need a translation for "install blahblah". :-)
Any ideas?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
$ cat modprobe.conf
alias eth0 e100
alias scsi_hostadapter ata_piix
alias snd-card-0 snd-intel8x0
install snd-intel8x0 /sbin/modprobe --ignore-install snd-intel8x0 && /usr/sbin/alsactl restore >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
remove snd-intel8x0 { /usr/sbin/alsactl store >/dev/null 2>&1 || : ; }; /sbin/modprobe -r --ignore-remove snd-intel8x0
alias usb-controller ehci-hcd
alias usb-controller1 uhci-hcd
alias scsi_hostadapter1 aic7xxx
This is without having made any changes. (The modprobe.conf dates back to Oct 5, when the card was installed, so the system must have added that line automatically.)
So it looks like I may need a translation for "install blahblah". :-)
Any ideas?
Thanks,
s1m0ne
ASKER
Glenn,
OK, it's working now, but not under Core 2.
I just upgraded to Fedora Core 3, and the SCSI controller/drive was detected right away. The only problem was that the anaconda installer tried to make the SCSI drive sda, and then couldn't continue because there was no swap partition (which, of course, did exist, but only on the SATA drive, which was now being called sdb.) I expect that most Linux gurus would know some simple way around this, but since I fall far short of guru status, all I knew to do was to disconnect the SCSI drive, upgrade to FC3, then reconnect the SCSI and reboot. Hey, whatever works, right?
Anyway, thanks for all your great help!
s1m0ne
OK, it's working now, but not under Core 2.
I just upgraded to Fedora Core 3, and the SCSI controller/drive was detected right away. The only problem was that the anaconda installer tried to make the SCSI drive sda, and then couldn't continue because there was no swap partition (which, of course, did exist, but only on the SATA drive, which was now being called sdb.) I expect that most Linux gurus would know some simple way around this, but since I fall far short of guru status, all I knew to do was to disconnect the SCSI drive, upgrade to FC3, then reconnect the SCSI and reboot. Hey, whatever works, right?
Anyway, thanks for all your great help!
s1m0ne
> Hey, whatever works, right?
Yep:-).
One trick one could do would be to edit fstab beforehand (worst case, from a rescue mode boot), but if that got you there, that is indeed enough!
Glad it finally works for you, and I hope you get a more enjoyable continuation with your linux experience.
Regards
-- Glenn
Yep:-).
One trick one could do would be to edit fstab beforehand (worst case, from a rescue mode boot), but if that got you there, that is indeed enough!
Glad it finally works for you, and I hope you get a more enjoyable continuation with your linux experience.
Regards
-- Glenn
Am I correct in assuming that your main partitions are on /dev/sda ?