Mount NTFS ON RAID 0 (Fedora 10)
 

Hi All
actually i am brand new in linux and want to see my NTFS partitions as i got 2 sata HD and make them raid 0 performance,and i got both OSs on it,i am using fedora 10 and can not mount them by defualt command and i got this error

[root@localhost ~]# mount /dev/sda2 /mnt/windows -t ntfs -r
Error opening '/dev/sda2': No such device or address
Failed to mount '/dev/sda2': No such device or address
Either the device is missing or it's powered down, or you have
SoftRAID hardware and must use an activated, different device under
/dev/mapper/, (e.g. /dev/mapper/nvidia_eahaabcc1) to mount NTFS.
Please see the 'dmraid' documentation for help.

thanks for help and suuupport

Dude. First off, awesome name. !!!!!!

Secondly: welcome to linux in all respects.

Thirdly: Redhat is run by facists. But that's just my personal opinion.

Fourthly: Talk in english if you want help, else we have to translate your geek speak. Sometiems it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Fifthly: post (show us) your /etc/fstab. Then, look at your /dev/ directory. There may be soemthing there that works to mount 'automatically'. I.e., to mount a cdrom, you just type
mount cdrom

There may be a mount md0, or raid0. I'm not as familiar with fedora (mostly because they are RUN BY FACISTS) but I digress. Use it at school, but not happy about it.

Sixth and Lastly: did you read the dmraid documentation? if the above fails, do what is says and try to mount /dev/mapper/WHATEVER(sata, or something).

Wow! hope you respond to this message, else I just wasted about ten minutes of my life.

!!!!! how are your hard drives set-up? Were these partitions originally raided in an unmirrored stripe by windows? I am presuming you are using mdadm for this, can you confirm if the actual partition sda2 exists within /dev/ or not and the other partition on sdb(?) that you are trying to raid this with.

Seriously... all that is being is little more then slightly irritating. These topics are for helping, not preaching.

[root@localhost ~]# fdisk -l
Warning: invalid flag 0x0000 of partition table 5 will be corrected by w(rite)

Disk /dev/sda: 122.9 GB, 122942324736 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 14946 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe509ca1e

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 1 3187 25599546 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sda2 4718 29893 202226220 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sda3 3188 3198 88357+ 83 Linux
/dev/sda4 3199 4717 12201367+ 5 Extended

Partition table entries are not in disk order

Disk /dev/sdb: 122.9 GB, 122942324736 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 14946 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xd2882c79

@r3sistance: apologies. humor: http://www.ubersoft.net/comic/kp/200...dons-aftermath. Also, I was a little drunk.

You have to be root to see /dev/anything. so

$su

or $sudo su

then look in /dev/

then $exit to stop being root.

:tisk: You should not be using a browser whilst running as root. And to "look at" a directory, use the ls command.

The package "dmraid" must be installed before you can see a motherboard raid. Once installed, as your first post suggested, look in /dev/mapper. Your arrays will end with a number. The device will not. e.g. "/dev/mapper/nvidia_eahaabcc1" is a mountable partition, "/dev/mapper/nvidia_eahaabcc" is not mountable and can be considered the array drive.

Also, I forgot to mention that you need to install the ntfs-3g package if you plan to write to this ntfs partition.

I already Installed the ntfs-3g packages and this is what i saw under /dev/mapper
[root@localhost dev]# control via_cgddjifhah via_cgddjifhahp1 via_cgddjifhahp2 via_cgddjifhahp3 via_cgddjifhahp4 via_cgddjifhahp5 via_cgddjifhahp6

i mean by root that i can su to be root any time but mostly I am using my normal username when i am using the GUI

I didnt thought it so complex to got a command to mount this NTFS while using Raid because most of servers are running on Raid

This is tricky, unless their is a corrosponding partition for this to be raided with your not gunna be able to mount it as a raid anyway, if it's literally raid 0 then you'd need both partitions mounted together as one raided device using say mdadm to declare both devices in raid just because of the way that raid 0 works. You can't read a raid 0 with only one half of the data.

since this is a dual boot system with windows windows (that I am guessing you recieved pre-installed?), is their any raid reported by windows itself? (under disc management section of computer management, can be found under administrative tools in the control panel). Problem is, until it's known what is going on, if their is a raid configuration, and if their is, how it's split over the two hard drives, hard to tell exactly what is needed to be done to mount this in linux.

Makes alot more sence now =P.

I am guessing you have either enbedded or hardware raid, If that is the case then that won't matter since fedora will need to be able to read that for it's only partitions anyways. I am assuming c: is sda1 and d: is sda2, do you have the same problem mounting sda1 as you do sda2? also can you confirm that c: and d: aren't mirroring each other or raided in any form to each other?

But are they connected to each other in a raid 0 or not? I should not think so since they look to be different sizes... but worth checking. I do not know why you can't seem to mount these, their shouldn't be any reason you can't since the raid drivers must be installed in fedora for fedora to even work...

That seems strange, it should not see sda and sdb as seperate if they are raided on a hardware or embedded level. I dunno what to suggest now =/.

:( :(

According to the fdisk output, you have two 120Gb drives (sda and sdb) connected to your system. One of those (sda) contains three partitions, and an invalid partition table; the other (sdb) has no partitions on it.

I suspect that both the "invalid partition table" and the "empty partition table" are artifacts of the hardware hardware RAID controller you're using. I also suspect that the problem occurs because you're using an inappropriate device driver in your Fedora system which is not correctly accessing the RAID controller.

Have you looked for appropriate Linux hardware drivers that you could add to your Linux system? Note that GRUB may not be able to boot from a hardware RAID configuration, so you may need to boot from GRUB on a USB memory stick or similar device, and you'll probably need to create an Initial RAM Disk Image linking in the correct driver.

The Fedora 10 Installation Guide remarks:(Emphasis added.)

Since you are not seeing a single drive, clearly -- as you've told us -- your systems not working correctly.

Silly question: Did you try just

$mount windows

who knows, you may get lucky.

EDIT: You ever post thinking it's stil on the first page, and all this fun stuff hasn't happened? Yeah.

If you want your NTFS drives automatically mounted when your Fedora system is booted, you can add the mounting instructions to /etc/fstab. Here, for example, are the NTFS mount lines from this laptop's Fedora /etc/fstab:Note that the mount points (/Vista and /Vista/Recovery) are created with mkdir, and the UUID values are found by looking at the output of ls -l /dev/disk/by-uuid. You can, of course, use LABEL= or the acutal pyhsical address to specify the device to mount. (I tend to avoid actual physical device identification since I sometimes change device locations, and want to have fstab independent of such fiddling.)

I have had a similar problem with attempting to build Fedora 10 on a Dell PowerEdge with a hardware RAID configuration. I installed Fedora 10 using a complete install (not an upgrade) and initialized the partitions completely. It appears to build correctly from the Fedora 10 DVD. However, after the end of the installation, the system reboot will give the error message

Volume Group "VolGroup00" not found
Unable to access remote device (/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01)
mount error mounting /dev/root on /sysroot as ext3: no such file or directory


At this point, it locks up and I cannot even get into grub.

The problem seems similar and may point to the difficulty here as well. Fedora 7 and Fedora9 both install and boot properly. Does anyone know why Fedora 10 would no longer build?

!!!!!, In case you are still interested:

Your sda and sdb are raid0 together. The second disk in a firmware raid0 set gets reported as having no partition table by fdisk, which is what you see. The first disk has the table for both, but the numbers may appear screwy. Don't worry about it, just don't mess with the partition table at this point.

Your raid is firmware raid or "fakeraid". It has already been setup by dmraid as listed by you:
which shows that you have a via Raid controller. Typing dmraid -s will show you the raid set.

As Quakeboy02 pointed out, you need merely mount the appropriate partitions such as /dev/mapper/via_cgddjifhahp1 using mount and the ntfs or ntfs-3g filesystem. eg.
Sabba Hillel: you have a different problem and probably need your own thread.

Put the command in your rc.local file (usually in /etc/rc.d) and it will be executed every time the system boots.

You could probably put it in fstab instead, but it is not necessary.

There's nothing wrong with just putting the

mount -t ntfs /dev/mapper/via_cgddjifhahp1 /mnt

(or preferably)

mount -t ntfs-3g /dev/mapper/via_cgddjifhahp1 /mnt

at the end of your rc.local using pico. You have to be root to mount or edit rc.local.

After you've done a sudo mkdir /Vista and sudo mkdir /Vista/Recovery you could do a sudo nano /etc/fstab and add this:where the numbers after the UUID= can be found in the output of ls -l /dev/disk/by-uuid/

Note that the mount point names are almost completely arbitrary, and can by in any directory you want to place them. I like to mount hard drives directly under / with name that start with an upper-case letter, but that's not a standard *nix convention. As mostelyharmless has suggested, the "conventional" mount point is a directory created under /mnt. (Although one way to read his suggestion is to mount the drive on /mnt which would preclude mounting more than one drive.) Bottom line: Where you decide to mount your NTFS drives is entirely up to you.