Accessing Archive

[seeker]

I have an archive of FAT32 at hdb1 which appears normally in Windows, but not in SuSe. I have edited /etc/fstab with the line: /dev/hdb1 /Archive FAT32 umask=0000,noauto 0 0, yet it remains invisible to SuSe. Is there a different edit of this line, or some other file that is necessary for this archive to be accessible?

[whig]

It isn't FAT32 it is vfat.

[seeker]

Great! I now have access to the archive. I only have one problem left...a similar one with my Windows XP x64 partition. It reads: /dev/hda3 /Windows/x64 ntfs umask=0000,noauto 0 0. When I click the icon that I made for the desktop, it says:

Could not mount device.
The reported error was:
mount: /dev/hda3 is not a valid block device

Any suggestions?

[chunkey]

Are you really sure that your Win x86_64 is on /dev/hda3?
(Normaly, Windows uses the _first_ primary partition and logical partitions).


fdisk /dev/hda -l (Note: -l = (small L))

[seeker]

Originally Posted by chunkey

Are you really sure that your Win x86_64 is on /dev/hda3?
(Normaly, Windows uses the _first_ primary partition and logical partitions).


fdisk /dev/hda -l (Note: -l = (small L))

You are a bit out of date. this was true of Win98/ME, but with XP, it can be on any partition you want. In my case, x32 in on the first, SuSe is on the second, and x64 is on the third partition.

[chunkey]

Then, I must have a different version of XP... O_o?

Originally Posted by seeker

Could not mount device.
The reported error was:
mount: /dev/hda3 is not a valid block device

you should check your dmesg output... (maybe next time you _can_ attach fdisk /dev/hda -l (-small L) output too)

[seeker]

I checked the dmesg output as you suggested, but there is so much data, that I have little idea of what it is all about. It kind of looks like the data that spools up while booting. I did notice that I could not find any mention of hda3, or anything similar, so it appears that for some reason that it's invisible to SuSe.

I tried running fdisk /dev/hda -l, but the terminal reported that the command was not found.

[chunkey]

yes, dmesg stores _recent_ all kernel messages.
so, only the last few lines are important...

Originally Posted by seeker

I tried running fdisk /dev/hda -l, but the terminal reported that the command was not found.

? suse ships without fdisk? or, are you root?

[seeker]

I'm in the root group, but it tried that as user.

Here is the last section of dmesg:

Code: 0f 0b 37 58 36 80 ff ff ff ff 9c 02 66 66 90 9c 8f 44 24 20
RIP <ffffffff80157891>{buffered_rmqueue+321} RSP <000001001b361ab8>
 <4>SFW2-OUT-ERROR IN= OUT=modem0 SRC=4.244.96.100 DST=70.87.46.147 LEN=40 TOS=0x08 PREC=0x00 TTL=64 ID=56222 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=1775 DPT=80 WINDOW=6432 RES=0x00ACK FIN URGP=0
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error
hda: lost interrupt
PPP: VJ decompression error
PPP: VJ decompression error

Nothing there means anything to me.

[seeker]

After posting, it dawned on me that you were saying that I had to be root...I can be a bit slow at times. Here is the output:

linux:~ # fdisk /dev/hda -l

Disk /dev/hda: 251.0 GB, 251000193024 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30515 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/hda1   *           1        3238    26009203+   7  HPFS/NTFS
/dev/hda2            3239        6502    26218080   83  Linux
linux:~ #

Obviously, SuSe can't see my x64.

[seeker]

Originally Posted by chunkey

Are you really sure that your Win x86_64 is on /dev/hda3?
(Normaly, Windows uses the _first_ primary partition and logical partitions).


fdisk /dev/hda -l (Note: -l = (small L))

Going back to this for a moment. I have had multiple installations of these systems, but in the two times that I can remember, when XP was in a partition after SuSe, or in an extended partition later in sequence, I had problems with that OS being visible to SuSe. However, a Microsoft article said that any Unix or Linux OS should be installed prior to any form of MS OS. Of course, this spoke in terms of time, rather than location, but as I said, W98/ME and some forms of NT do require a partition at the beginning.

I think that I will try reorganizing the systems with XP located in front and see what happens. I remember that this time around, SuSe was the first system installed, with x32 following. A repair of Grub made that work fine, but when x64 followed up the rear, it works on it's own through the Windows boot.ini, but it is hiding from SuSe. I do not know if this problem is due to the installation process, or if there is something different about x64, but I guess that I will have to go by trial and error.