[linux-lvm] Restricted partitions?

[linux-lvm] Restricted partitions?

[Bradley M Alexander]

Hello all,

Are there any partitions/filesystems that should not be used without an
initrd besides /? Here is my partition list:

/dev/hda3              1542188   1056676    485512  69% /
/dev/hda1                 7746      3499      3847  48% /boot
/dev/hda5              1517920    724696    762384  49% /var
/dev/hda6               155545        41    147474   1% /tmp
/dev/hda7              1028092    876116    151976  86% /home
/dev/hda8              1542156    967744    574412  63% /usr/local
/dev/hda9               514028    286816    227212  56% /opt
/dev/hda10             8192832   7117692   1075140  87% /mirror
/dev/hda11            15213032  13261916   1951116  88% /archive

As you can see, /home, /mirror and /archive are starting to get close to
having a problem, which I why I wanted to implement lvm. I have two 30GB
drives, the secomd of which is empty, so I was going to put /var, /tmp,
/home, /usr/local, /opt, /mirror and /archive on a volgroup on the second
drive, then once it stabilized, create a second volgroup on /dev/hda from
the partitions that are now on the volgroup on hdb.

I went in, using 1.0.1rc4 and kernel 2.4.13 and created the partitions on
the volume group on hdb. Ran lilo and changed fstab. Rebooted and it could
not mount the volumes, and gave me a "Can't locate module /dev/vg01" and
for each partition, it tries to load them as modules. The LVM code is
compiled into the kernel.

At this point, I have two prime suspects. Either one of the partitions I am
trying to mount on the volume group should not be without an initrd (/tmp
or /var?) or its a problematic interaction with devfs. Can anyone point me
to a solution?

Regards,
-- 
--Brad
============================================================================
Bradley M. Alexander, CISSP              |   Co-Chairman,
Beowulf System Admin/Security Specialist |    NoVALUG/DCLUG Security SIG
Debian/GNU Linux Developer		 |   storm@debian.org
                                         |   storm@tux.org
============================================================================
No, just _a_ Zaphod Beeblebrox. Didn't you hear? I come in six-packs."

Re: [linux-lvm] Restricted partitions?

[Wolfgang Weisselberg]

Hi, Bradley!

Bradley M Alexander (storm@tux.org) wrote 50 lines:

> Are there any partitions/filesystems that should not be used without an
> initrd besides /? Here is my partition list:

> /dev/hda1                 7746      3499      3847  48% /boot

This one might be a problem.  (think: growing it, and it might
even end up on a different HD.)

> I have two 30GB
> drives, the secomd of which is empty, so I was going to put /var, /tmp,
> /home, /usr/local, /opt, /mirror and /archive on a volgroup on the second
> drive, then once it stabilized, create a second volgroup on /dev/hda from
> the partitions that are now on the volgroup on hdb.

Why 2 volumegroups, why not one that grows by appending the
(then free) space of /dev/hda?  

> I went in, using 1.0.1rc4 and kernel 2.4.13 and created the partitions on
> the volume group on hdb. Ran lilo and changed fstab. Rebooted and it could
> not mount the volumes, and gave me a "Can't locate module /dev/vg01" and
> for each partition, it tries to load them as modules. The LVM code is
> compiled into the kernel.

/dev/vg01 is your new volume group, right?  I _think_ devfs
sees it accessed and tries to load the appropriate module
(none, but it doesn't know).

> At this point, I have two prime suspects. Either one of the partitions I am
> trying to mount on the volume group should not be without an initrd (/tmp
> or /var?)

Both are on LVM here -- and if my system really needs /tmp it
can easily use /tmp -- which would be on / then ( /tmp is not mounted
then).  The only problem will be that after mounting those
you won't be able to access the files which are there, but on
the root partition.  But then mounting is a very early step
in the boot process, so that won't be a problem.

> or its a problematic interaction with devfs. 

That would be my guess.

-Wolfgang

Re: [linux-lvm] Restricted partitions?

[Bradley M Alexander]

On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 03:46:32PM +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
> Hi, Bradley!
> 
> Bradley M Alexander (storm@tux.org) wrote 50 lines:
> 
> > Are there any partitions/filesystems that should not be used without an
> > initrd besides /? Here is my partition list:
> 
> > /dev/hda1                 7746      3499      3847  48% /boot
> 
> This one might be a problem.  (think: growing it, and it might
> even end up on a different HD.)

Actually, that was not one that I was going to LVM.

> > I have two 30GB
> > drives, the secomd of which is empty, so I was going to put /var, /tmp,
> > /home, /usr/local, /opt, /mirror and /archive on a volgroup on the second
> > drive, then once it stabilized, create a second volgroup on /dev/hda from
> > the partitions that are now on the volgroup on hdb.
> 
> Why 2 volumegroups, why not one that grows by appending the
> (then free) space of /dev/hda?  

I thought it might be more efficient to have two than one that straddled
drives. 

> > I went in, using 1.0.1rc4 and kernel 2.4.13 and created the partitions on
> > the volume group on hdb. Ran lilo and changed fstab. Rebooted and it could
> > not mount the volumes, and gave me a "Can't locate module /dev/vg01" and
> > for each partition, it tries to load them as modules. The LVM code is
> > compiled into the kernel.
> 
> /dev/vg01 is your new volume group, right?  I _think_ devfs
> sees it accessed and tries to load the appropriate module
> (none, but it doesn't know).

Yes it is. Then further down in dmesg, it kept trying to load
/dev/vg01/lv_tmp, lv_archive and all of the other partitions as modules as
well.

> > At this point, I have two prime suspects. Either one of the partitions I am
> > trying to mount on the volume group should not be without an initrd (/tmp
> > or /var?)
> 
> Both are on LVM here -- and if my system really needs /tmp it
> can easily use /tmp -- which would be on / then ( /tmp is not mounted
> then).  The only problem will be that after mounting those
> you won't be able to access the files which are there, but on
> the root partition.  But then mounting is a very early step
> in the boot process, so that won't be a problem.
> 
> > or its a problematic interaction with devfs. 
> 
> That would be my guess.

I have tried asking this same question on two LUG lists, this list, the
debian and debian-devel irc channels, and thus far, no one has an answer.

-- 
--Brad
============================================================================
Bradley M. Alexander, CISSP              |   Co-Chairman,
Beowulf System Admin/Security Specialist |    NoVALUG/DCLUG Security SIG
Debian/GNU Linux Developer		 |   storm@debian.org
                                         |   storm@tux.org
============================================================================
Know guns, Know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety.