9:03 a.m.
I have two drives in this computer, sda has Fedora 19 installed on it,
sdb has Fedora 10, both the dreaded LVM's!
What esoteric string of commands is required to permit access to the
Download directory on F-19 from F-20?
At this point I am considering re-installing both using a conventional
directory system such as I have just installed for Fedora 20 and Centos
6.5 on another computer ...
Any suggestions appreciated,
Bob
--
http://www.qrz.com/db/w2bod
Box10 Fedora-20/64bit Linux/XFCE
11:02 a.m.
1) Boot from a LiveCD or LiveUSB with only one hard drive connected.
2) Rename the volume group on that hard drive (using the "vgrename" command)
3) Plug the second hard drive, and boot into Linux from the hard drive
4) Activate the other LVM ("vgchange -ay" is a quick way to do this)
5) Mount the other LVM partitions as necessary ("mount /dev/mapper/blah...
/mnt/somewhere", changing the paths to match your situation, or just use
Nautilus to handle the mounting)
Hope that helps.
-Jared (also from Virginia)
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA <
bobgoodwin(a)wildblue.net> wrote:
I have two drives in this computer, sda has Fedora 19 installed on
it, sdb
has Fedora 10, both the dreaded LVM's!
What esoteric string of commands is required to permit access to the
Download directory on F-19 from F-20?
At this point I am considering re-installing both using a conventional
directory system such as I have just installed for Fedora 20 and Centos 6.5
on another computer ...
Any suggestions appreciated,
Bob
--
http://www.qrz.com/db/w2bod
Box10 Fedora-20/64bit Linux/XFCE
--
users mailing list
users(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
5:45 a.m.
Allegedly, on or about 18 February 2014, Jared K. Smith sent:
or just use Nautilus to handle the mounting
That's never worked, here. Unencrypted or encrypted, even though it
asks for the password and accepts it, the volumes inside it don't get
mounted, just the plain boot partition (which isn't LVM) gets mounted.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64
All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point
trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the
public lists.
George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not
a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments.
9:31 p.m.
On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Pete Travis wrote:
On Feb 18, 2014 1:15 PM, "Mark Haney"
<mhaney(a)practichem.com> wrote:
> It's never that trivial in my experience. Regardless of if
the VGs
> and LVs are named identically or not. And that's a big part of the
> frustration. The biggest hurdle I've encountered has been
> incompatible LVM versions between what I'm using to mount with and
> what I'm mounting. Granted, I've not had to do that sort of thing in
> a couple of years, so maybe it's better now, but prior to 2012 it was
> a nightmare.
I can appreciate your concern - I have some horror stories too - but
we
have no indication that Bob has those kind of problems, and venting your
frustration does little to address his immediate problem.
Even if venting was the intent, Mark accomplished more than venting.
He reduced the likelihood that Bob would eventually
be written off as a problem user or some such.
A problem user being one who attempts strange things,
e.g. using his computer in the shower,
and then neglects to tell us about them.
The result being that something that works perfectly for everyone
else fails miserably for him, but no one will ever know why.
--
Michael hennebry(a)web.cs.ndsu.NoDak.edu
"SCSI is NOT magic. There are *fundamental technical
reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young
goat to your SCSI chain now and then." -- John Woods
3:27 p.m.
On 18/02/14 15:24, Pete Travis wrote:
I can appreciate your concern - I have some horror stories too - but
we have no indication that Bob has those kind of problems, and venting
your frustration does little to address his immediate problem.
--Pete
I have installed F-20 using conventional directories on a third hard
drive and will no longer have to deal with the LVM. I'm know LVMs work
and have used them for a while since they were the default installation
and I took the simplest route. I intend to do without them for a while ...
Bob
--
http://www.qrz.com/db/w2bod
Box10 Fedora-20/64bit Linux/XFCE
2:24 p.m.
On Feb 18, 2014 1:15 PM, "Mark Haney" <mhaney(a)practichem.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/18/2014 03:09 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
>
> Jared is assuming here that you have identically named VGs and LVs.
> If that is not the case, only his step 5 applies. This is a
> logical leap, because you are mostly communicating frustration and
> simply mounting a filesystem on an LV isn't difficult or
> fundamentally different from mounting a filesystem on a normal
> partition - blkid to list filesystems and their device nodes, then
> fstab or mount manually.
>
> If you do have identically named VGs and LVs, did you create them
> during installation? Was the older installation visible during the
> process?
>
It's never that trivial in my experience. Regardless of if the VGs
and LVs are named identically or not. And that's a big part of the
frustration. The biggest hurdle I've encountered has been
incompatible LVM versions between what I'm using to mount with and
what I'm mounting. Granted, I've not had to do that sort of thing in
a couple of years, so maybe it's better now, but prior to 2012 it was
a nightmare.
- --
Mark Haney
I can appreciate your concern - I have some horror stories too - but we
have no indication that Bob has those kind of problems, and venting your
frustration does little to address his immediate problem.
--Pete
2:15 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/18/2014 03:09 PM, Pete Travis wrote:
Jared is assuming here that you have identically named VGs and LVs.
If that is not the case, only his step 5 applies. This is a
logical leap, because you are mostly communicating frustration and
simply mounting a filesystem on an LV isn't difficult or
fundamentally different from mounting a filesystem on a normal
partition - blkid to list filesystems and their device nodes, then
fstab or mount manually.
If you do have identically named VGs and LVs, did you create them
during installation? Was the older installation visible during the
process?
It's never that trivial in my experience. Regardless of if the VGs
and LVs are named identically or not. And that's a big part of the
frustration. The biggest hurdle I've encountered has been
incompatible LVM versions between what I'm using to mount with and
what I'm mounting. Granted, I've not had to do that sort of thing in
a couple of years, so maybe it's better now, but prior to 2012 it was
a nightmare.
- --
Mark Haney
Network/Systems Administrator
Practichem
W: (919) 714-8428
Fedora release 20 (Heisenbug) 3.12.10-300.fc20.x86_64
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTA79vAAoJEM/YzwEAv6e7MGYIAITYDW74gO1flfE6D481n/mg
xEqN8nIbOnB7/1uIuhlBqqFkNaBHcmArx5Abl65TBTuBA5s+8m7z3X+8x1MGYd8H
uoOdkB7dXIAP0wSeq1113jy1JJGUgC9y+A0I77H+Gp9GejIGxeHqjg5I9WmATZGx
5cTN1SZITC6GTJQ8F4LKlsNn5tP3Prm1N7MEBCgsxlzWiNpqZYBPFr0floPLGbn1
a1YOYsYHdWOGa3xzTO9UWMkjlSzb6LhGw5yvIPArHHKH1zxbCdhISUDKZB7lyceH
3nLlGm2LkPw9dontMjLjDtcDaQOl+aJh9CBa+bUJM7hfzVX0kXKNmcf90nwzhjg=
=w0De
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
2:09 p.m.
On Feb 18, 2014 11:01 AM, "Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA" <
bobgoodwin(a)wildblue.net> wrote:
On 18/02/14 12:02, Jared K. Smith wrote:
>
> 1) Boot from a LiveCD or LiveUSB with only one hard drive connected.
> 2) Rename the volume group on that hard drive (using the "vgrename"
command)
> 3) Plug the second hard drive, and boot into Linux from the hard
drive
> 4) Activate the other LVM ("vgchange -ay" is a quick way to do this)
> 5) Mount the other LVM partitions as necessary ("mount
/dev/mapper/blah...
/mnt/somewhere", changing the paths to match your
situation, or just use Nautilus to handle the mounting)
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> -Jared (also from Virginia)
And if I had installed with conventional directories I would simply mount
the other
hard drive and extract the information I needed.
Yet another example of why I should not be installing with LVM, nothing I
do gains
anything from LVM, it is just another layer of unwanted complexity
for this Fedora user.
I am sure your suggestions would help if I was inclined to pursue this.
Thank you,
Bob
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA <
bobgoodwin(a)wildblue.net <mailto:bobgoodwin@wildblue.net>> wrote:
>
> I have two drives in this computer, sda has Fedora 19 installed on
> it, sdb has Fedora 20, both the dreaded LVM's!
>
> What esoteric string of commands is required to permit access to
> the Download directory on F-19 from F-20?
>
> At this point I am considering re-installing both using a
> conventional directory system such as I have just installed for
> Fedora 20 and Centos 6.5 on another computer ...
>
> Any suggestions appreciated,
>
> Bob
>
--
Jared is assuming here that you have identically named VGs and LVs. If that
is not the case, only his step 5 applies. This is a logical leap, because
you are mostly communicating frustration and simply mounting a filesystem
on an LV isn't difficult or fundamentally different from mounting a
filesystem on a normal partition - blkid to list filesystems and their
device nodes, then fstab or mount manually.
If you do have identically named VGs and LVs, did you create them during
installation? Was the older installation visible during the process?
--Pete
1:45 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 02/18/2014 02:30 PM, g wrote:
On 02/18/2014 06:15 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 02/18/2014 10:01 AM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
>> Yet another example of why I should not be installing with
>> LVM, nothing I do gains anything from LVM, it is just another
>> layer of unwanted complexity for this Fedora user.
>
> I'm sure that there are many good uses for it in a production
> environment, but as a home user I've always considered it
> nothing more than an answer in search of a problem.
i would say that you are close.
i call lvm a problem looking for systems to screw up.
i lost 3 ext4 drives when i attempted to install f18 to the system
and even tho i selected for it not to, it installed lvm.
whoever came up with lvm should be castrated, dip in boiling hot
oil, then put on a 10' rotisserie spit run from mouth to rectum and
turned slowly until there is nothing left but a crispy ash.
i do not need software dividing up partitions for me because it
thinks it knows best.
i have done very well setting up systems from first days of red hat
and i have never had a problem of running out of hard drive space.
Amen, brother. I posted a few days ago the futility I have with
recovering LVM volumes. I don't really even see the need for it in
production systems, at least for non-RAID volumes (preferably RAID5 or
better). I have a couple dozen CentOS VMs that were installed with
LVM and it drives me batsh*t crazy because I can't find any
nagios/Icinga plugin that monitors the drives if they are LVMs. I
know, it sounds kinda winy, but it's true. I want to know what my
drives are doing. But with LVM it's virtually impossible.
(It's so bad, I'm migrating my entire production server farm VMs to
EXT4 (maybe BTRFS) since they are sitting on two massive RAID5 SANs
and the LVMS just make it impossible to manage if something craps out
on boot.
- --
Mark Haney
Network/Systems Administrator
Practichem
W: (919) 714-8428
Fedora release 20 (Heisenbug) 3.12.10-300.fc20.x86_64
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTA7g8AAoJEM/YzwEAv6e7EEsH/22WvHi4uLBW5YBsHhuJjO4d
DaLIgHuFH4mreqDBNmROipCSDVy/b/6dQ+BnGEWnCm2jI0sRfPRJcGdBMZppnU5i
f8BLgZV+qgtOJKbnv7T+4saa4r3IcoagChjFthbXA/PoLhFw9birlnkGsV/oXDja
O1Bn11MTvjLET+xOkJFlMdeMVO+WBPzCavWuQb4vL3d7g7EzmDbgmv1TXfwv4xQO
ZLBgdSsFzcVTQknqp63Ypn3C8I8VV+zpvTWPZhRcu711lH/mxI8wy5x6xIkWr+db
lVxai48HXhfklhggrrzlFme91gBp36vOujTmJ2gNQ0Ao0zCsV5UFScC0haEaEAM=
=eCPX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
1:30 p.m.
On 02/18/2014 06:15 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
On 02/18/2014 10:01 AM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
> Yet another example of why I should not be installing with LVM,
> nothing I do gains anything from LVM, it is just another layer of
> unwanted complexity for this Fedora user.
I'm sure that there are many good uses for it in a production
environment, but as a home user I've always considered it nothing
more than an answer in search of a problem.
i would say that you are close.
i call lvm a problem looking for systems to screw up.
i lost 3 ext4 drives when i attempted to install f18 to the
system and even tho i selected for it not to, it installed lvm.
whoever came up with lvm should be castrated, dip in boiling
hot oil, then put on a 10' rotisserie spit run from mouth to
rectum and turned slowly until there is nothing left but a
crispy ash.
i do not need software dividing up partitions for me because
it thinks it knows best.
i have done very well setting up systems from first days of
red hat and i have never had a problem of running out of
hard drive space.
--
peace out.
in a world with out fences, who needs gates.
tc.hago.
g
.
12:15 p.m.
On 02/18/2014 10:01 AM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA wrote:
Yet another example of why I should not be installing with LVM,
nothing
I do gains anything from LVM, it is just another layer of unwanted
complexity for this Fedora user.
I'm sure that there are many good uses for it in a production
environment, but as a home user I've always considered it nothing more
than an answer in search of a problem.
12:01 p.m.
On 18/02/14 12:02, Jared K. Smith wrote:
1) Boot from a LiveCD or LiveUSB with only one hard drive connected.
2) Rename the volume group on that hard drive (using the "vgrename"
command)
3) Plug the second hard drive, and boot into Linux from the hard drive
4) Activate the other LVM ("vgchange -ay" is a quick way to do this)
5) Mount the other LVM partitions as necessary ("mount
/dev/mapper/blah... /mnt/somewhere", changing the paths to match your
situation, or just use Nautilus to handle the mounting)
Hope that helps.
-Jared (also from Virginia)
And if I had installed with conventional directories I would simply
mount the other hard drive and extract the information I needed.
Yet another example of why I should not be installing with LVM, nothing
I do gains anything from LVM, it is just another layer of unwanted
complexity for this Fedora user.
I am sure your suggestions would help if I was inclined to pursue this.
Thank you,
Bob
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Bob Goodwin - Zuni, Virginia, USA
<bobgoodwin(a)wildblue.net <mailto:bobgoodwin@wildblue.net>> wrote:
I have two drives in this computer, sda has Fedora 19 installed on
it, sdb has Fedora 20, both the dreaded LVM's!
What esoteric string of commands is required to permit access to
the Download directory on F-19 from F-20?
At this point I am considering re-installing both using a
conventional directory system such as I have just installed for
Fedora 20 and Centos 6.5 on another computer ...
Any suggestions appreciated,
Bob
--
http://www.qrz.com/db/w2bod
Box10 Fedora-20/64bit Linux/XFCE
3760
days inactive
3761
days old
11 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Bob Goodwin -
g -
Jared K. Smith -
Joe Zeff -
Mark Haney -
Michael Hennebry -
Pete Travis -
Tim