LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware
User Name
Password
Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 11-12-2008, 11:16 PM   #1
IcoNyx
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Nevada
Distribution: Anything but Ubuntu... don't ask.
Posts: 145

Rep: Reputation: 15
1.5 TB external HDD will not automount...


ok I am a storage monkey... I went out and bought a massive 1.5TB hard drive (1500 GB)

I run OpenSuSE on my little lappy here so I just opened up my can o' system tools and formatted this beast with ext3... first I used gparted to do the job... but after formatting the drive failed to mount... I opened "computer" and double clicked on the "USB drive" and I get "Unable to mount location, Can't mount file."

Strange, I thought... so I used qtparted... same results... so I used terminal and ran
Code:
# mkfs.ext3 /dev/sdb1
Same bleeding results!!!

so now I am sitting here thinking to myself... this is a replacement for another Seagate barracuda drive (450GB model)... and THAT drive worked fine! so I grabbed that drive and using acronis migrate easy, I copied the partition from my 450GB drive to the new drive... SUCCESS!!! I was then able to mount the drive easily!

so next I used gparted to resize the partition to the full 1.5TB... FAIL!

the drive is back to "Unable to mount location, Can't mount file."

Now I have created a folder in media (/media/MVARCHIVE/) and using the following command:
Code:
# mount /dev/sdb1 /media/MVARCHIVE/
I can mount the drive as root, and access it, and add my crap to it!

so... why can't I just MOUNT the frikin' drive as a normal user? why do I have to mount it as root in terminal? Is this fixable? or am I just hosed?
 
Old 11-12-2008, 11:37 PM   #2
pinniped
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: planet earth
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 1,732

Rep: Reputation: 50
Well, typically normal users *can't* mount stuff unless they are given explicit permission via an fstab entry. These days there is also some primitive policy control but I just have it deactivated and I really can't recall the details.

Anyway, the polite thing to do is to create an fstab entry for that external disk. If you rely on various other tools to magically mount things rather than using the lowest level system tools you have (like 'mount'), you also run the risk of encountering more bugs.
 
Old 11-13-2008, 12:44 AM   #3
IcoNyx
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Nevada
Distribution: Anything but Ubuntu... don't ask.
Posts: 145

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
ok... that makes sense... but why did it work (automount) on a smaller drive of the same make? also why can I create a smaller partition on the same drive and it successfully automounts?

is there something else maybe?
 
Old 11-13-2008, 01:10 AM   #4
pinniped
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: planet earth
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 1,732

Rep: Reputation: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by IcoNyx View Post
ok... that makes sense... but why did it work (automount) on a smaller drive of the same make? also why can I create a smaller partition on the same drive and it successfully automounts?
As I already suggested, it may be a problem with the particular automount tools you are using. I really have no idea because not enough information was presented to make a valid deduction.
 
Old 11-13-2008, 01:14 AM   #5
Electro
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Be careful adding a line in /etc/fstab for external storage devices. I suggest set a label for the drive or partition, so you can mount by label instead by device node.

Automounting is not perfect.

Last edited by Electro; 11-14-2008 at 03:12 AM. Reason: I thought I put not perfect, it is corrected now
 
Old 11-13-2008, 09:59 AM   #6
IcoNyx
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Nevada
Distribution: Anything but Ubuntu... don't ask.
Posts: 145

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electro View Post
Be careful adding a line in /etc/fstab for external storage devices. I suggest set a label for the drive or partition, so you can mount by label instead by device node.

Automounting is perfect.
I agree with you, I actually am hesitant to screw around with fstab anyway... I prefer my tools to behave in an expected manner and automount just isn't...

I plan to try several other distros to see if this is a distro specific problem... sorry pinniped, I just don't buy the whole automount tools being broken or defective... I have two drives here, both Seagate barracuda ST3***AS models (meaning they have identical firmware and controller models) the only physical difference between these drives is the storage density, and the only logical difference is the media density. Heck they use the same logical layout and bit offset! so this is not a physical defect.

If I create a partition UNDER 1000 GB I can automount fine... the only time I experience a problem is when I create a partition OVER 1000 GB... you know... I have this problem on a raid set I have... 1.7 TB... it does the same thing... I never realized it because I DO use an fstab entry for that one, only because it's an internal raid set (md0) and the physical identifier will never change.

Ok, changing tak... pinniped, I DO agree with your assessment. something wrong with the automount tools... anyone know of any that work on partitions greater than a terrabyte?
 
Old 11-13-2008, 10:36 AM   #7
farslayer
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: Northeast Ohio
Distribution: linuxdebian
Posts: 7,248
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 191Reputation: 191
Just FYI Seagate has admitted there is an issue with the 1.5 TB Barracuda drives..

This is most likely unrelated to your current problem, But I thought you should be made aware..

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15863
 
Old 11-13-2008, 11:06 PM   #8
IcoNyx
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Nevada
Distribution: Anything but Ubuntu... don't ask.
Posts: 145

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by farslayer View Post
Just FYI Seagate has admitted there is an issue with the 1.5 TB Barracuda drives..

This is most likely unrelated to your current problem, But I thought you should be made aware..

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15863
hmm... nope. I haven't seen this issue and I have been doing A LOT of data movement on that drive... despite the automount issue.
 
Old 11-14-2008, 03:45 AM   #9
Electro
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by IcoNyx View Post
I agree with you, I actually am hesitant to screw around with fstab anyway... I prefer my tools to behave in an expected manner and automount just isn't...

I plan to try several other distros to see if this is a distro specific problem... sorry pinniped, I just don't buy the whole automount tools being broken or defective... I have two drives here, both Seagate barracuda ST3***AS models (meaning they have identical firmware and controller models) the only physical difference between these drives is the storage density, and the only logical difference is the media density. Heck they use the same logical layout and bit offset! so this is not a physical defect.

If I create a partition UNDER 1000 GB I can automount fine... the only time I experience a problem is when I create a partition OVER 1000 GB... you know... I have this problem on a raid set I have... 1.7 TB... it does the same thing... I never realized it because I DO use an fstab entry for that one, only because it's an internal raid set (md0) and the physical identifier will never change.

Ok, changing tak... pinniped, I DO agree with your assessment. something wrong with the automount tools... anyone know of any that work on partitions greater than a terrabyte?
I corrected my last post. I suggest do not depend on automounting.


I suggest do not buy Seagate hard drives. I suggest Hitachi and Western Digital hard drives because they do not have as many problems as Seagate hard drives.

Not all USB to SATA/IDE converters supports more than 1 terabyte hard drives.
 
Old 11-21-2008, 11:33 PM   #10
rcbpage
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 27

Rep: Reputation: 0
re: 1.5 TB Drive

IcoNyx;
Most likely your problem is that your kernel was not compiled
with large drive support, most of the shelf distros, except
for server versions aren't built with this option enabled.
look in your /boot/config-(whatever-your-kernel ver) for
CONFIG_LBD=y if it's not there you will have to either
re-build your kernel or make do with a smaller partition

Good Luck

ps. I would favor a smaller partition, just because a check
disk on a huge drive takes a looong time. :-)


rcb
 
Old 03-28-2009, 03:25 AM   #11
IcoNyx
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2003
Location: Nevada
Distribution: Anything but Ubuntu... don't ask.
Posts: 145

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Sorry for the lack of responce... Issue resolved... sort of...

I ended up reformatting the drive using acronis... that fixed it.

Unfortunately I have now gone back to Debian... Love the deb... And my issue is back... now I know formatting this beast is not the fix... it's a band aid, also I have absolutly NO idea why formatting it with one utility as opposed to another would resolve the issue when the partition table and jornal should be the same no matter what... right?

but there you have it. format with enough Partitioning tools and you will eventually fix it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcbpage View Post
IcoNyx;
Most likely your problem is that your kernel was not compiled
with large drive support, most of the shelf distros, except
for server versions aren't built with this option enabled.
look in your /boot/config-(whatever-your-kernel ver) for
CONFIG_LBD=y if it's not there you will have to either
re-build your kernel or make do with a smaller partition

Good Luck

ps. I would favor a smaller partition, just because a check
disk on a huge drive takes a looong time. :-)
rcb
Nope. sorry man, I already checked for this before I posted the first time. Mu kernels have all supported large volumes... sort of... this has been an issue with me since before I got a single 1500GB drive. A while back I was running a mass storage controller with 7 300s and they worked GREAT... except as an internal raid controller (md0) I tended to mount using fstab and leave it connected permanently... as an external drive, I want to be able to pull the drive out and connect it willie-nillie... ie: hot plug. Sometimes it's handy when you need to move a mass of binaries from one PC to another and back "sneaker-net" style.

*Sigh* I have the feeling this one's going to haunt me for a LOOONG time.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
External ubuntu install on external USB HDD th3_tr00p3r Linux - Newbie 1 05-11-2008 03:56 PM
Installing Ubuntu on External HDD; PC has no internal HDD 449 Ubuntu 2 11-28-2007 06:12 PM
booting machine with linux on an external HDD without HDD connected drsoum Linux - Newbie 2 07-22-2007 04:47 AM
Automount hdd on fedora core 6 eugen.serban Linux - Newbie 3 04-04-2007 02:46 AM
Bootable partion on external HDD? 40 gb firelight hdd. Trebile34 Linux - Hardware 1 03-14-2005 12:50 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:52 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration