Re: cant mount usb disk

|> dmesg
|> [code]
|> .........
|> Attached scsi removable disk sdb at scsi2, channel 0, id 0, lun 0
|> SCSI device sdb: 512000 512-byte hdwr sectors (262 MB)
|> sdb: Write Protect is off
|> /dev/scsi/host2/bus0/target0/lun0: unknown partition table
|> WARNING: USB Mass Storage data integrity not assured
|> USB Mass Storage device found at 4
|> .........
|> [/code]
|
| You should find the partition table at:
| /dev/scsi/host2/bus0/target0/lun0/disc
|
|> [code]
|> # mount -t ext3 /dev/scsi/host1/bus0/target0/lun0/disc /mnt/usb
|> mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on
|> /dev/scsi/host1/bus0/target0
|> /lun0/disc,
|> or too many mounted file systems
|> [/code]
|
| You have to mount the specific partition, i.e. something like:
| mount -t ext3 /dev/scsi/host1/bus0/target0/lun0/part1 /mnt/usb
|
|> the usb disk had been formated to ext3, and the kernel supports ext3
|
| Sure, but you have to find the partition at the first sector of the
whole
| disc (.../lun0/disc) and inside this partition table the partitions are
| declared; you have to mount them and not the disc.

Apparently he doesn't even have a valid partition table on it.
Maybe he formatted the whole disk originally, anyway, and has
since let something else goof up the master sector.

That might be, but I am irritated by the fact that the partition table is
searched at "lun0" and not "lun0/disc", so I thought there might be some
other problem.

| But, of course, you could get rid of the partition table and use the
whole
| usb stick/disk as a single partition. But that is not compatible in the
PC
| world at all, as every usb storage device must have a partition (even if
| there's only one partition).

Only because so many devices expect there to be one, and expect
it to be a DOS style partition table (and probably can't handle
logical partitions).

What if the device itself needs a partition table (to store any internal
data or whatever... many devices nowadays are "windows-compatible", but
nothing else) ? And another thing I had thought about was the fact that
there is an error message (the warning); I would get rid of it as fast as
possible. Everything I do (even if it is non-standard) must work without
warnings / errors, this is the way I function. So I simply thought - if
there is a warning about the partition table, then there should be one.

Another idea is that the BIOS (or whatever hardware does the work) decided
to "clean" the partition table as it was invalid? Then the idea of a
partition-free file system (or device) is lost anyway.

But you are right, it is not necessary to have a partition table.

Regards,
Sebastian


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 8.0-BETA1 bsdlabel broken?
    ... Today I had a nasty surprise when I fired up bsdlabel to increase the ... partition c: partition extends past end of unit ... WARNING: da0s2 expected rawoffset 0, ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: 8.0-BETA1 bsdlabel broken?
    ... Today I had a nasty surprise when I fired up bsdlabel to increase the ... partition c: partition extends past end of unit ... WARNING: da0s2 expected rawoffset 0, ...
    (freebsd-current)
  • Re: Serious Computer Problems:
    ... give an option to format the disk, only to delete the partition. ... You apparently are trying to do a clean install of Windows (and yes, ... C:\hiberfil.sys [WARNING] The file could not be opened! ... I also had Word and Excel on the desktop toolbar and I was able to put ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: trying to add a new hard drive
    ... > label is loop even though i've labelled the partition with e2label. ... the warning, ... Are you sharing this port with an IDE cd? ...
    (linux.redhat)
  • Disklabe oddity
    ... Warning, partition c doesn't cover the whole unit! ... An incorrect partition c may cause problems for standard system ... The disk was formatted by the FreeBSD install procedure. ...
    (freebsd-questions)