Subject: Re: IT WORKED! Moo-ha-ha-ha-hah!
To: Peter Seebach <seebs@plethora.net>
From: David Brownlee <abs@anim.dreamworks.com>
List: current-users
Date: 08/20/1999 12:45:11
Congratulations!
Any chance you could write up an FAQ entry describing the
process? :)
David/absolute
Q: Why do ducks have flat feet? Q: Why do elephants have flat feet?
A: To stamp out forest fires. A: To stamp out flaming ducks.
On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Peter Seebach wrote:
> So, I have a pair of ~6GB EIDE drives.
>
> I have them under BSD/OS, running as a "splice" (like ccd, only a different
> guy wrote it).
>
> Unfortunately, BSD/OS has no DMA support.
>
> So.
>
> I move them. I move them to an alpha, with a Promise plug-in EIDE card.
>
> Initial state: Nothing works.
> I get a beta driver, and a friendly guy sends me a patch to make it work
> right on my alpha.
>
> I now see the disks.
>
> If I ccd them, I end up with a disk. Unfortunately, the superblock is about
> 32 blocks in. If I build a label for it, I see the superblock, and I can
> mount, but fsck dies horribly. ls works, ls -l doesn't.
>
> So, I rework the disk labels to use 32 block cylinders, and (thanks to Chris
> Demetriou) manage to create new labels that show partitions starting "one
> cylinder" in.
>
> I ccd these.
>
> The resulting partition fsck's almost-okay:
>
> # fsck /dev/ccd0c
> ** /dev/rccd0c
> ** Last Mounted on /mnt
> ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes
> ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames
> ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity
> ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts
> ** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups
> FREE BLK COUNT(S) WRONG IN SUPERBLK
> SALVAGE? [yn] y
>
> BLK(S) MISSING IN BIT MAPS
> SALVAGE? [yn] y
>
> SUMMARY INFORMATION BAD
> SALVAGE? [yn] y
>
> 132202 files, 1854200 used, 1427180 free (19092 frags, 176011 blocks, 0.6%
> fragmentation)
>
> MARK FILE SYSTEM CLEAN? [yn] y
>
>
> ***** FILE SYSTEM MARKED CLEAN *****
>
> ***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
>
>
> It mounts.
>
> It lists.
>
> Files pass checksum.
>
> And it took me about 20 minutes less to figure this all out than it would have
> to newfs and restore. Yee-hah!
>
> The depressing thing is that nfs-exporting this to my other box gets better
> performance than I got having the drives physically in the other box. Yow.
>
> -s
>