On 23/10/2021 18:04, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sat, 2021-10-23 at 14:19 +1030, Tim via users wrote:
Nor even is computer literacy a prerequisite for being a tech support
person, either: I had to get my ISP to change their faulty router,
that was an exercise in stupidity. You can't phone th
On Sat, 2021-10-23 at 14:19 +1030, Tim via users wrote:
> Nor even is computer literacy a prerequisite for being a tech support
> person, either: I had to get my ISP to change their faulty router,
> that was an exercise in stupidity. You can't phone them, you had to
> do
> it over the internet, i
Roger Heflin
>> LVM is also used to make separate LV's such that critical
>> filesystems can have their own space and be protected against
>> another filesystem filling up (if you only had a single
>> filesystem).
Jonathan Billings:
> While you can do this with separate partitions with file sys
On Fri, 22 Oct 2021 at 18:11, Roger Heflin wrote:
> there are only like 2-3 ways to get it not activated on boot..
>
> This is a misconfig of some sort, not random breakage (unless it is metad).
>
> cat /proc/cmdline
> disable/mask lvm2-lvmetad if your fedora version has it, it causes weird
> lvm
there are only like 2-3 ways to get it not activated on boot..
This is a misconfig of some sort, not random breakage (unless it is metad).
cat /proc/cmdline
disable/mask lvm2-lvmetad if your fedora version has it, it causes weird
lvm issues (ie random fail to find/enable vgs).
Did "vgchange -ay"
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 03:02:29PM -0400, John Mellor wrote:
> Yup, but btrfs and zfs also do the same thing, except more elegantly. One
> thing that btrfs does NOT do only on Fedora at this time is fs encryption,
> which is super useful on a laptop. I'm unsure why Fedora is still using the
> clun
On 2021-10-22 1:14 p.m., Roger Heflin wrote:
LVM is also used to make separate LV's such that critical filesystems
can have their own space and be protected against another filesystem
filling up (if you only had a single filesystem).
. . .
Yup, but btrfs and zfs also do the same thing, exc
John Mellor wrote:
>Anyway you cut this, even if you get the problem fixed, you can no
>longer trust that this machine is sane. You have suffered some kind of
>critical corruption, and who knows if you've corrected it or whether
>there is more undiscovered damage or loss. ...
Yep, I've come to
Roger Heflin wrote:
>run "systemd-analyze critical-chain home.mount" and it will show you the
>requirements.
>And if you find a dependency not working run at "systemctl status "
>against it, and that should show you what error it got.
# systemd-analyze critical-chain home.mount
home.mount @2mi
On Oct 22, 2021, at 13:16, Roger Heflin wrote:
>
> LVM is also used to make separate LV's such that critical filesystems can
> have their own space and be protected against another filesystem filling up
> (if you only had a single filesystem).
>
> There are reasons to use it, especially if you
LVM is also used to make separate LV's such that critical filesystems can
have their own space and be protected against another filesystem filling up
(if you only had a single filesystem).
There are reasons to use it, especially if you don't want filling up a
/data only filesystem to impact the OS
On Fri, 2021-10-22 at 09:09 -0400, John Mellor wrote:
> Maybe moving up to a less complex storage system with built-in volume
> and raid management and dynamic error detection/correction (like
> btrfs or zfs) would also be a better move at this point.
I've always queried the point of using LVM by
(top-posted due to the length of this thread)
Anyway you cut this, even if you get the problem fixed, you can no
longer trust that this machine is sane. You have suffered some kind of
critical corruption, and who knows if you've corrected it or whether
there is more undiscovered damage or loss
run "systemd-analyze critical-chain home.mount" and it will show you the
requirements.
I would suspect something going wrong with the activation of the home lv.
On boot up do a "lvs" post that info. The Attr column will show if it is
activated or not.
And if you find a dependency not working
I asked:
> Not sure how to title this issue but I'd appreciate advice. A laptop
> running F34 crashed last night and won't start properly since. The
> only errors I can see and find in the logs indicate some unknown
> issue mounting the /home filesystem. The system has /boot and an LVM
> partition
On 10/21/21 5:15 PM, Jonathan Billings wrote:
On Oct 21, 2021, at 00:51, Joe Zeff wrote:
I'm not familiar with LVM, but I'm sure there's an equivalent to fsck for it.
You might want to boot from a LiveUSB and running it while the partition isn't
mounted to make sure there aren't any problem
On Oct 21, 2021, at 00:51, Joe Zeff wrote:
>
> I'm not familiar with LVM, but I'm sure there's an equivalent to fsck for it.
> You might want to boot from a LiveUSB and running it while the partition
> isn't mounted to make sure there aren't any problems there.
LVM is not a file system, just
Since it is home, I would edit fstab and change "defaults" to
"defaults,nofail" that will result in the system booting up if/when home is
missing. Then you can look at what is going on with home with the system
booted and all tools.
Rule #1: avoid emergency mode and get the system on the network
On 10/20/21 10:01 PM, Dave Close wrote:
It seems apparent to me that there is no problem with the LVM partition
or the /home filesystem. So I don't understand why startup is failing
nor how to discover the true cause.
I'm not familiar with LVM, but I'm sure there's an equivalent to fsck
for it
Not sure how to title this issue but I'd appreciate advice. A laptop
running F34 crashed last night and won't start properly since. The
only errors I can see and find in the logs indicate some unknown
issue mounting the /home filesystem. The system has /boot and an LVM
partition with / and /home. /
20 matches
Mail list logo
