On 12/15/24 02:55, Roger Price wrote:
I have to replace a dead SSD and re-install Debian 12. I use Graphical
Install with manual partitioning of the disks so that I can specify
mount points for my existing RAID partitions on spinning disks. During
the specification of my new partitions I
On Sun, 15 Dec 2024, Roger Price wrote:
Is there some way within the Graphical Install to get back to manual
partitioning without having to start again from scratch? I backed up to
re-specifying the root password, but that was not sufficient.
Sorry for the noise. To answer my own question
I have to replace a dead SSD and re-install Debian 12. I use Graphical Install
with manual partitioning of the disks so that I can specify mount points for my
existing RAID partitions on spinning disks. During the specification of my new
partitions I made a mistake, and selected "Go Bac
Entr the above line, changes will take part.
Hope this helps.
Best regards
Hans
> Alexander Straub
>
> Pater-Faller-Str. 6
>
> 79837 Germany
>
> Subject: "Next" button missing on manual partitioningI installed Debian
> 12 on my computer.
>
> I select
lps.
Best regards
Hans
> Alexander Straub
>
> Pater-Faller-Str. 6
>
> 79837 Germany
>
> Subject: "Next" button missing on manual partitioningI installed Debian
> 12 on my computer.
>
> I selected the "Manual Partitioning" option and selected a pa
Alexander Straub
Pater-Faller-Str. 6
79837 Germany
Subject: "Next" button missing on manual partitioningI installed Debian
12 on my computer.
I selected the "Manual Partitioning" option and selected a partition.
However, the "Next" button is not available (o
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 23:09:15 -0600
David Wright wrote:
> On Thu 16 Feb 2023 at 08:59:58 (+0100), Nicolas George wrote:
> > pa...@quillandmouse.com (12023-02-15):
> > > Here's why you would partition a drive. Reinstalling (which I end
> > > up having to do every time Debian comes out with a new ve
On 16/02/2023 22:25, Joe wrote:
Stretch installed perfectly dual-boot with Win 10 on an EFI Acer
netbook, but upgrading to Buster broke booting to grub. It actually
broke EFI booting completely, but I've been able to restore booting at
least to Windows. And yes, I've tried everything the Net can
On Thu 16 Feb 2023 at 08:59:58 (+0100), Nicolas George wrote:
> pa...@quillandmouse.com (12023-02-15):
> > Here's why you would partition a drive. Reinstalling (which I end up
> > having to do every time Debian comes out with a new version
>
> Debian is not Ubuntu, major upgrade do not break the s
Cindy Sue Causey wrote:
...
have you tried refind?
i've been using it for several years now and while i do still
have grub installed and it gets updated i primarily use refind
instead.
songbird
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 19:33:32 +
"Andrew M.A. Cater" wrote:
> It's likely that LILO will go with Bookworm - I think it's more or
> less unmaintained if I recall correctly, so someone needs to help you
> getting this one to work. Is this your only machine?
It doesn't seem to be in Bookworm now.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 02:11:02PM -0500, Cindy Sue Causey wrote:
> > Upgrades are definitely a lot more trouble now, and yes, I do realise
> > that each release is bigger and more complicated than the last.
>
>
> Ditto. I can still remember saying (on Debian-User) that if someone
> wanted to des
On 2/16/23, Joe wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 08:59:58 +0100
> Nicolas George wrote:
>
>> pa...@quillandmouse.com (12023-02-15):
>> > Here's why you would partition a drive. Reinstalling (which I end up
>> > having to do every time Debian comes out with a new version
>>
>> Debian is not Ubuntu, ma
On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 08:59:58 +0100
Nicolas George wrote:
> pa...@quillandmouse.com (12023-02-15):
> > Here's why you would partition a drive. Reinstalling (which I end up
> > having to do every time Debian comes out with a new version
>
> Debian is not Ubuntu, major upgrade do not break the sy
> Therefore, except for the narrow case of writing into a block which has
> never before been written, every write on a SSD *is* an erase+write
> operation.
No, that would lead to terribly poor performance (both in terms of
speed and in terms of wear).
>> So: you read the whole block, blank it, t
The Wanderer (12023-02-16):
> That is exactly what I've always been told *does* happen, ever since
> first reading about how SSDs et cetera work, more than a decade ago.
> This is the first time I've seen a suggestion to the contrary.
This is surprising to me, since I have had the exact opposite
i
On 2023-02-16 at 08:10, Nicolas George wrote:
> The Wanderer (12023-02-16):
>
>> filesystems et cetera aligned to physical blocks, because physical block
>> size defines the minimum size that can be erased (and, therefore,
>> overwritten) in any given operation,
>
> This is true. Note: erased, no
The Wanderer (12023-02-16):
> filesystems et cetera aligned to physical blocks, because physical block
> size defines the minimum size that can be erased (and, therefore,
> overwritten) in any given operation,
This is true. Note: erased, not written.
> and th
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 02:22:56AM -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
What physical boundaries do SSDs have to report? All I know about that are
exposed
are sector size and sector count. I have yet to find one where logical/physical
were not 512B/512B.
Don't worry about it; modern partition tools align
Am 16.02.2023 um 13:30 schrieb DdB:
> Unfortunately, the
> data set related to this, i could gather personally is not large
> enough to be telling.
https://www.servethehome.com/ssd-alignment-quickly-benchmark-ssd/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Am 16.02.2023 um 13:00 schrieb The Wanderer:
> This being the very first time I can remember having encountered
> even the suggestion that there's no need to be concerned about
> erase-block sizes when dealing with SSDs et cetera, I hope it's
> under
On 2023-02-16 at 05:45, Nicolas George wrote:
> DdB (12023-02-16):
>
>> Am 16.02.2023 um 09:31 schrieb Felix Miata:
>> > None of the 25 or so SSDs/NVMEs I have have 4k sectors. e.g.
>>
>> Wow, they must be rather old, then. ;-)
>>
>> I know, i am not the only one ...
>> https://serverfault.com/q
DdB (12023-02-16):
> Am 16.02.2023 um 09:31 schrieb Felix Miata:
> > None of the 25 or so SSDs/NVMEs I have have 4k sectors. e.g.
>
> Wow, they must be rather old, then. ;-)
>
> I know, i am not the only one ...
> https://serverfault.com/questions/1113068/how-to-find-page-size-of-my-ssd
Of cours
Am 16.02.2023 um 09:31 schrieb Felix Miata:
> None of the 25 or so SSDs/NVMEs I have have 4k sectors. e.g.
Wow, they must be rather old, then. ;-)
I know, i am not the only one ...
https://serverfault.com/questions/1113068/how-to-find-page-size-of-my-ssd
DdB composed on 2023-02-16 09:15 (UTC+0100):
> Felix Miata wrote:
>> What physical boundaries do SSDs have to report? All I know about that are
>> exposed
>> are sector size and sector count. I have yet to find one where
>> logical/physical
>> were not 512B/512B.
> That is what i meant: nowad
Am 16.02.2023 um 08:22 schrieb Felix Miata:
> What physical boundaries do SSDs have to report? All I know about that are
> exposed
> are sector size and sector count. I have yet to find one where
> logical/physical
> were not 512B/512B.
That is what i meant: nowadays SSD's at least are AF Advanc
pa...@quillandmouse.com (12023-02-15):
> Here's why you would partition a drive. Reinstalling (which I end up
> having to do every time Debian comes out with a new version
Debian is not Ubuntu, major upgrade do not break the system.
--
Nicolas George
DdB composed on 2023-02-16 07:44 (UTC+0100):
> I do use (NVMe-) SSD, and i did partition it.
> I did it to make sure, pages/partitions start on PHYSICAL boundaries,
> not the logical ones reported to satisfy Windooze.
What physical boundaries do SSDs have to report? All I know about that are
ex
Am 16.02.2023 um 07:44 schrieb DdB:
> I do use (NVMe-) SSD, and i did partition it.
> I did it to make sure, pages/partitions start on PHYSICAL boundaries,
> not the logical ones reported to satisfy Windooze. Not every model
> reports correct hardware parameters to the OS.
>
> What i would recomme
erentiated c/o
> directory-tree layout, is there any further advantage
> to be had in partitioning *these* drives?
>
> (I do understand somewhat the difference between the
> drive types -- e.g., that SSDs don't assign functional
> space. I'm just not sure what o
On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 11:23:52PM -0500, pa...@quillandmouse.com wrote:
Here's why you would partition a drive. Reinstalling (which I end up
having to do every time Debian comes out with a new version) means
overwriting the storage.
I already acknowleged that people can do what they want based
On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 18:45:49 -0500
Michael Stone wrote:
>
> I don't personally think there's a point in partitioning any storage
> device on a user system these days beyond what's required to boot. If
> you want to do more, that's a personal preference. Bein
27;ve been accustomed
to and have always fastidiously *partitioned*.
With my file groupings already well differentiated c/o
directory-tree layout, is there any further advantage
to be had in partitioning *these* drives?
(I do understand somewhat the difference between the
drive types -- e.g., that
On 15/02/2023 22:58, PMA wrote:
is there any further advantage
to be had in partitioning *these* drives?
Although some people still prefer to leave about 20% of a SSD as raw
unpartitioned space, so SSD can spare/level out sectors to that empty
space, this is IMO on longer necessary, as you
On 16/2/23 07:45, Michael Stone wrote:
I don't personally think there's a point in partitioning any storage
device on a user system these days beyond what's required to boot. If
you want to do more, that's a personal preference. Being an SSD
doesn't really change
layout, is there any further advantage
to be had in partitioning *these* drives?
(I do understand somewhat the difference between the
drive types -- e.g., that SSDs don't assign functional
space. I'm just not sure what other issue may apply.)
I don't personally think there'
be had in partitioning *these* drives?
(I do understand somewhat the difference between the
drive types -- e.g., that SSDs don't assign functional
space. I'm just not sure what other issue may apply.)
Thanks in advance for your time!
Best regards,
Peter Armstrong
Hi,
David Christensen wrote:
> > So that you can boot the system drive in old and new computers -- e.g.
> > MBR is "lowest common denominator".
Felix Miata wrote:
> I just found out from Asus that Intel 500 series chipsets do not support CSM.
> Luckily my cloned NVME came from another NVME config
On 12/14/21 6:52 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
David Christensen composed on 2021-12-14 18:40 (UTC-0800):
Jorge P. de Morais Neto wrote:
Why MBR partitioning
So that you can boot the system drive in old and new computers -- e.g.
MBR is "lowest common denominator".
I just found out
David Christensen composed on 2021-12-14 18:40 (UTC-0800):
> Jorge P. de Morais Neto wrote:
>> Why MBR partitioning
> So that you can boot the system drive in old and new computers -- e.g.
> MBR is "lowest common denominator".
I just found out from Asus that Intel 5
; again.
> ³ Despite the advice given above, there are occasions when installing
> a newer version from an older system that the client might display
> an out-of-date fingerprint.
> ⁴ Don't press continue unless you're going to, say, abort. One could
> get very
On Sat 16 Oct 2021 at 18:47:25 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Sat 16 Oct 2021 at 10:12:34 -0500, David Wright wrote:
>
> [Lots of snipping]
>
> > If you want to see a blow-by-blow example of the partitioner, you
> > could revisit this post from a while back. IIRC the thread exercises
> > most of the
gt; order i.e. first /home/richard then /home/richard/Downloads.
>
> I think my question was misunderstood.
> Perhaps I should have repeated "Disk partitioning phase of installation"
> in the body of my message.
>
> Rephrasing my question:
>
> Can I, during the
On Sat 16 Oct 2021 at 10:12:34 -0500, David Wright wrote:
[Lots of snipping]
> If you want to see a blow-by-blow example of the partitioner, you
> could revisit this post from a while back. IIRC the thread exercises
> most of the wrinkles that could occur if the user interface is
> misunderstood.
gt; > > > > >
> > > > > > > My questions:
> > > > > > > 1. Can I have /home/richard/Downloads be on its own partition?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes. The only thing to consider is that they are mounted in cor
Hello,
On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 06:27:49AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> Can I, during the manual disk partitioning phase, specify that
> /home/richard/Downloads be on its own partition *AND* the rest of
> /home/richard/ be on its own partition?
Yes, because when you specify what file
then /home/richard/Downloads.
I think my question was misunderstood.
Perhaps I should have repeated "Disk partitioning phase of installation" in
the body of my message.
Rephrasing my question:
Can I, during the manual disk partitioning phase, specify that
/home/richard/Downloads be
> > ├── Notebooks
> > > > > └── Pictures
> > > > >
> > > > > My questions:
> > > > > 1. Can I have /home/richard/Downloads be on its own partition?
> > > >
> > > > Yes. The only thing to consider is that
repeated "Disk partitioning phase of installation" in
the body of my message.
Rephrasing my question:
Can I, during the manual disk partitioning phase, specify that
/home/richard/Downloads be on its own partition *AND* the rest of
/home/richard/ be on its own partition?
A moun point can be
tions:
> > > > 1. Can I have /home/richard/Downloads be on its own partition?
> > >
> > > Yes. The only thing to consider is that they are mounted in correct
> > > order i.e. first /home/richard then /home/richard/Downloads.
> >
> > I think my questi
is that they are mounted in correct
> > order i.e. first /home/richard then /home/richard/Downloads.
>
> I think my question was misunderstood.
> Perhaps I should have repeated "Disk partitioning phase of installation" in
> the body of my message.
>
> Rephras
?
Yes. The only thing to consider is that they are mounted in correct
order i.e. first /home/richard then /home/richard/Downloads.
I think my question was misunderstood.
Perhaps I should have repeated "Disk partitioning phase of installation"
in the body of my message.
Rephrasing m
Richard Owlett writes:
I routinely place /home on its own partition.
Its structure resembles:
/home/richard
├── Desktop
├── Documents
├── Downloads
├── Notebooks
└── Pictures
My questions:
1. Can I have /home/richard/Downloads bed on its own partition?
Yes. The only thing to consider is that
On 16/10/2021 11:39, Richard Owlett wrote:
I routinely place /home on its own partition.
Its structure resembles:
/home/richard
├── Desktop
├── Documents
├── Downloads
├── Notebooks
└── Pictures
My questions:
1. Can I have /home/richard/Downloads bed on its own partition?
Of course. Create a p
I routinely place /home on its own partition.
Its structure resembles:
/home/richard
├── Desktop
├── Documents
├── Downloads
├── Notebooks
└── Pictures
My questions:
1. Can I have /home/richard/Downloads bed on its own partition?
2. How could I have found the answer?
TIA
guided partitioning. This despite the fact I'm ready to wipe the
target USB. I switched to the Busybox console (Ctrl+Alt+F2) and
checked that the target USB was not mounted. Frustrating.
My computer clearly can boot from both MBR (Windows partition is type
07h partition) and EFI partitions (the D
On Mi, 11 mar 20, 12:58:21, Alan Tu wrote:
>
> I have the second USB inserted into a different USB port. I need this
> second USB to have my *.ucode firmware file on it, for my Intel wifi
> chip. Therefore this second USB has a FAT32 partition at first.
I would suggest you use an image that inclu
On 2020-03-11 12:58, Alan Tu wrote:
Hi, I need some ideas for getting Debian 10.3 to install and boot.
I prefer the "CD-1" Debian Installer image, available via [1] or [2].
I would wipe the target drive, install Debian, and then install the
Wi-Fi drivers.
David
[1]
https://cdimage.de
sees the wi-fi firmware file, gets onto the network, and
now its time to partition. At this point I'm ready to erase the second
USB and make it my permanent live USB. For whatever reason, the
installer complains that the free space is too small [2], and guided
partitioning does not work for me.
Suppo
On 10/25/19 7:44 AM, Wayne Sallee wrote:
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From: * Wayne Sallee
*To: * Debian-user
*CC: *
*Date: * 2019-10-23 10:37 AM
Original Message
*Subject: * Re
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From: * Wayne Sallee
*To: * Debian-user
*CC: *
*Date: * 2019-10-23 10:37 AM
Original
On 10/23/2019 10:37 AM, Wayne Sallee wrote:
> Select "Partition disk"
>
> You will then see a number of options; one being guided partitioning,
> but no option for manual partition.
What? This screen _is_ the manual partition editor! The "guided"
option is displ
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From: * Christopher David Howie
*To: * Debian-user
*CC: *
*Date: * 2019-10-22 12:43 PM
On 10/13/19 6:56 PM, Wayne Sallee wrote:
The non-graphical needs work too:
There&#
On 10/13/19 6:56 PM, Wayne Sallee wrote:
> The non-graphical needs work too:
> There's no manual partitioning option without going first to guided
> partitioning
This is patently false. Every Debian setup I have done in the last ten
years I've done with manual partitioni
Hi.
Posting HTML mail here is considered bad manners.
Please configure your e-mail client appropriately.
Also, please refrain from top-posting, this is a maillist, not your
typical enterprisey spamfest.
On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 08:00:13AM -0400, Wayne Sallee wrote:
> I like Virtual Box on
Sallee
wa...@waynesallee.com
http://www.WayneSallee.com
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From: * Peter Ehlert
*To: * Wayne Sallee ,
Debian-user
*CC: *
*Date
on helping the developers
making Debian more accessible.
On 10/14/19 2:08 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:
Wayne Sallee writes:
The non-graphical needs work too:
Hi,
so here it's non-graphical...
There's no manual partitioning option without going first to guided
partitioning, so if you don&
ed virtualbox; no need to burn any CD or USB.
>
> 8ec21625aadaddec8ba0de0ff915db03 debian-live-10.1.0-amd64-mate.iso
> ab54364f4e066bba8d2010b5f8c0daad debian-live-9.2.0-amd64-mate.iso
>
>
> Wayne Sallee
> wa...@waynesallee.com
> http://www.WayneSallee.com
>
> ---- Original
Wayne Sallee writes:
The non-graphical needs work too:
Hi,
so here it's non-graphical...
There's no manual partitioning option without going first to guided
partitioning, so if you don't like the way it wants to partition the drive,
and you look for manual parition, tha
ssage
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From: * Peter Ehlert
*To: * Debian-user
*CC: *
*Date: * 2019-10-14 09:51 AM
I am no expert but I am more than willing to follow along.
Perhaps you have found a bug.
I don't have an optical drive, I use USB
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From: * Peter Ehlert
*To: * Debian-user
*CC: *
*Date: * 2019-10-14 09:51 AM
I am no expert but I am more than
I am no expert but I am more than willing to follow along.
Perhaps you have found a bug.
I don't have an optical drive, I use USB, but that should not matter.
On 10/13/19 3:56 PM, Wayne Sallee wrote:
The non-graphical needs work too:
There's no manual partitioning option without goin
The non-graphical needs work too:
There's no manual partitioning option without going first to guided
partitioning, so if you don't like the way it wants to partition the
drive, and you look for manual parition, that option is not
available. Odly enough
ome kind of
results" , "in circles" etc.
please explain
Yes, it is a bit intimidating the first few times around, but pleas help
us out.
Wayne Sallee
wa...@waynesallee.com
http://www.WayneSallee.com
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer,
http://www.WayneSallee.com
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From: * Linux-fan
*To: * Debian-user
*CC: *
*Date: * 2019-9-29 11:51 AM
Wayne Sallee
w
On 29/09/2019 21:32, Liam O'Toole wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Sep, 2019 at 10:56:54 -0400, Wayne Sallee wrote:
>> Debian really needs to work on the manual partitioning part of the
>> installation.
>>
>> It's absolutely pathetic.
>>
>> Wayne Sallee
>&
On Sun, 29 Sep, 2019 at 10:56:54 -0400, Wayne Sallee wrote:
> Debian really needs to work on the manual partitioning part of the
> installation.
>
> It's absolutely pathetic.
>
> Wayne Sallee
> wa...@waynesallee.com
> http://www.WayneSallee.com
>
Thank y
Wayne Sallee wrote:
> Debian really needs to work on the manual partitioning part of the
> installation.
>
> It's absolutely pathetic.
Do you have specific suggestions for improvement?
-dsr-
Wayne Sallee writes:
What partitioning tool are you talking about?
Wayne Sallee
mailto:wa...@waynesallee.com>wa...@waynesallee.com
http://www.WayneSallee.com>http://www.WayneSallee.com
When I think of the debian partitioning tool, I think of this one:
https://lists.debian.org/debia
On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 10:56:54 -0400
Wayne Sallee wrote:
> Debian really needs to work on the manual partitioning part of the
> installation.
>
> It's absolutely pathetic.
Some more detail would be useful. For example,how would you do it
better?
Code submissions would be w
What partitioning tool are you
talking about?
Wayne Sallee
wa...@waynesallee.com
http://www.WayneSallee.com
Original Message
*Subject: * Re: Debian Installer, Manual Partitioning is a Joke
*From
Your mail is a joke,
I think debian partitionning tool is the best i tried.
It's your taste but don't tell it's a joke.
Le 29/09/2019 à 16:56, Wayne Sallee a écrit :
Debian really needs to work on the manual partitioning part of the
installation.
It's absolutely pathet
Debian really needs to work on the manual partitioning part of the installation.
It's absolutely pathetic.
Wayne Sallee
wa...@waynesallee.com
http://www.WayneSallee.com
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:36:59PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> >and the destination ended up bigger,
> >possibly because one or more of the backups on the source had been using some
> >kind of hardlink de-dupe (I've ranted about hardlink trees being a problem in
> >various backup topics on -u
Hello,
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 08:36:59PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> Is anyone aware of a utility that can walk a file system and replace
> identical files with hard links?
As an alternative to doing this, you could consider using a
filesystem with block-level de-duplication support.
ZFS
On 03/14/2017 04:52 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2017-03-13 at 23:36, David Christensen wrote:
Is anyone aware of a utility that can walk a file system and replace
identical files with hard links?
Try rdfind. It's in Debian; I don't use it myself, largely because the
(accepted upstream years a
On 03/14/2017 03:34 AM, David wrote:
On 14 March 2017 at 14:36, David Christensen wrote:
Doing a quick test, it appears that rsync copies hard linked files as if
each were a different file:
rsync -a hard-link-1/ hard-link-2
Here, 'man rsync' says:
"Note that -a does not preserve hardlinks,
On 2017-03-13 at 23:36, David Christensen wrote:
> On 03/13/2017 02:01 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:00:45PM -0800, David Christensen wrote:
>> and the destination ended up bigger, possibly because one or more
>> of the backups on the source had been using some kind
On 14 March 2017 at 14:36, David Christensen wrote:
>
> Doing a quick test, it appears that rsync copies hard linked files as if
> each were a different file:
>
> rsync -a hard-link-1/ hard-link-2
Here, 'man rsync' says:
"Note that -a does not preserve hardlinks, because finding
multiply-linked f
On 03/13/2017 02:01 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:00:45PM -0800, David Christensen wrote:
I'd always put a step 0) in there: is imaging what you want to do? Consider
a file-level backup with rsync (etc etc, as discussed elsewhere in this
thread)
I do imaging for system
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:00:45PM -0800, David Christensen wrote:
> >I'd always put a step 0) in there: is imaging what you want to do? Consider
> >a file-level backup with rsync (etc etc, as discussed elsewhere in this
> >thread)
>
> I do imaging for system disks. I do backups and archives for
On 03/10/2017 12:49 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 09:04:56PM -0800, David Christensen wrote:
I use LUKS swap (random key) and root (passphrase). I think it's the piece
of the boot chain that gives me the LUKS prompt for root (before the GRUB
menu).
You get that prompt *b
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 09:04:56PM -0800, David Christensen wrote:
> I use LUKS swap (random key) and root (passphrase). I think it's the piece
> of the boot chain that gives me the LUKS prompt for root (before the GRUB
> menu).
You get that prompt *before* GRUB?
I use LUKS everywhere and only g
On 03/08/2017 10:56 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Was that disk ever used for anything besides Jessie, not new or
wiped first?
The disk was wiped before installing Jesse.
Run strings on it or view in a sector editor and you'll probably see
grub somewhere, if it's a typical Linux installation that p
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 09:46:32PM -0800, David Christensen wrote:
> What is in blocks 1-101?
I believe it's part of grub. My limited understanding of how it works is
it's split up into separate stages designed to fit within the "holes" in
a typical MBR layout, each stage having enough code to ini
Hi,
David Christensen wrote:
> Examining a Windows XP disk, the first partition (C:\) starts at block 63
> (track 1):
> [...]
> Number Start End SizeType File system Flags
> 1 63s156296384s 156296322s primary ntfs boot
That's an oldfashioned layout. Bad
David Christensen composed on 2017-03-08 21:46 (UTC-0800):
...
Examining a Jesse system drive, the first partition starts at block 2048
(1 MB = 2**20 bytes):
2017-03-08 21:30:04 root@jesse ~
# parted /dev/sda u s p
Model: ATA SAMSUNG SSD UM41 (scsi)
Disk /dev/sda: 31277232s
Sector size (logica
On 03/08/2017 03:02 AM, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
David Christensen wrote:
AFAIK when using MBR partitioning, the partition table (blocks 0-62)
The MBR partition table resides in the first 512-bytes block.
It may be extended by a chain of partitions starting at the Extended
Partition of the MBR
I was reading
https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/apbs04.html.en#preseed-partman
AND
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/d-i/debian-installer.git/plain/doc/devel/partman-auto-recipe.txt
.
# If the system has free space you can choose to only partition
that space.
# This is only honore
tand why you can't. I can create (and did)
> > > > partitions of 200 MB size. I use the text based installer and
> > > > manual partitioning.
> > >
> > > On a 4k/sector, 2 terabyte disk? I tried from 500m to 2g, it would
> > > not accept it. Fina
1 - 100 of 1030 matches
Mail list logo
