fstab prob when using diskdrake

[Renaud (Ron) Olgiati]

Just added a new HD to the box, and ran diskdrake to partition, format and
mount it.

Before running diskdrake, I had in /etc/fstab a couple entries that were
commented out, as the relevant HD is out of the box.

I was surprised to see, after running diskdrake, that those entries had
disappeared from fstab.
 
Cheers,
 
Ron.

PS I use the ofl fashioned fstab, with entries like
     /dev/hda10 /tmp ext3 defaults 1 2
none of the new fangled entries like
     # Entry for /dev/sda1 :
     UUID=8b724c96-bfd9-4751-b852-16641fa7559b /toto ext3 relatime,umask=0 1 2
--
                 The two most common elements in the Universe
                         are hydrogen and stupidity.
                                            -- Harlan Ellison
                                   
                   -- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --

[Mike Grello]

On Monday 08 September 2008, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:

> Just added a new HD to the box, and ran diskdrake to partition, format and
> mount it.
>
> Before running diskdrake, I had in /etc/fstab a couple entries that were
> commented out, as the relevant HD is out of the box.
>
> I was surprised to see, after running diskdrake, that those entries had
> disappeared from fstab.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ron.
>
> PS I use the ofl fashioned fstab, with entries like
>      /dev/hda10 /tmp ext3 defaults 1 2
> none of the new fangled entries like
>      # Entry for /dev/sda1 :
>      UUID=8b724c96-bfd9-4751-b852-16641fa7559b /toto ext3 relatime,umask=0
> 1 2

Not for nothin' so what you are saying is that the configuration GUI
strong-armed your fstab?  And that at least irritates you?  Just asking.
You would prefer it just did as you instructed?  I'm not saying anything, just
saying.   On a happier note, I think it makes a backup of the file when it
does things like that.  It should be named fstab.diskdrak.,something.  I
would be surprised if this is not the case, as the other config files seem to
follow this convention.

--
The Lord works vindication and justice for all who are oppressed. He made
known his ways to Moses, his acts to the people of Israel.
The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast
love.
 He will not always accuse, nor will he keep his anger forever. He does not
deal with us according to our sins, nor repay us according to our iniquities.
- Psalms 103:6-10

[James Kerr-2]

On Monday 08 September 2008, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:

> Just added a new HD to the box, and ran diskdrake to partition, format
> and mount it.
>
> Before running diskdrake, I had in /etc/fstab a couple entries that were
> commented out, as the relevant HD is out of the box.
>
> I was surprised to see, after running diskdrake, that those entries had
> disappeared from fstab.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ron.
>
> PS I use the ofl fashioned fstab, with entries like
>      /dev/hda10 /tmp ext3 defaults 1 2
> none of the new fangled entries like
>      # Entry for /dev/sda1 :
>      UUID=8b724c96-bfd9-4751-b852-16641fa7559b /toto ext3
> relatime,umask=0 1 2

IIRC something similar happens if you comment lines in grub's menu.lst. The
next time you add a new kernel, the commented lines are deleted. I'm not
sure if this is done deliberately or if it's a bug.

Jim

[Renaud (Ron) Olgiati]

On Monday 08 September 2008, my mailbox was graced by a missive
 from Mike Grello <mgrello@...> who wrote:

> > Just added a new HD to the box, and ran diskdrake to partition, format
> > and mount it.
> > Before running diskdrake, I had in /etc/fstab a couple entries that were
> > commented out, as the relevant HD is out of the box.
> > I was surprised to see, after running diskdrake, that those entries had
> > disappeared from fstab.
> > PS I use the ofl fashioned fstab, with entries like
> >      /dev/hda10 /tmp ext3 defaults 1 2
> > none of the new fangled entries like
> >      # Entry for /dev/sda1 :
> >      UUID=8b724c96-bfd9-4751-b852-16641fa7559b /toto ext3
> > relatime,umask=0 1 2
>
> Not for nothin' so what you are saying is that the configuration GUI
> strong-armed your fstab?  And that at least irritates you?  Just asking.

It leaves me less than completely gruntled.

> You would prefer it just did as you instructed?  I'm not saying anything,
> just saying.  

Yes, I jolly well would; or at least that it warned me that it was removing
entries.

> On a happier note, I think it makes a backup of the file
> when it does things like that.  It should be named
> fstab.diskdrak.,something.  I would be surprised if this is not the case,
> as the other config files seem to follow this convention.

No such file in /etc  ;-4(
 
Cheers,
 
Ron.
--
                        Nous avons tous assez de force
                      pour supporter les maux d'autrui.
                              -- Duc de Larochefoucault
                                   
                   -- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --

[Mike Grello]

On Monday 08 September 2008, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:

> On Monday 08 September 2008, my mailbox was graced by a missive
>
>  from Mike Grello <mgrello@...> who wrote:
> > > Just added a new HD to the box, and ran diskdrake to partition, format
> > > and mount it.
> > > Before running diskdrake, I had in /etc/fstab a couple entries that
> > > were commented out, as the relevant HD is out of the box.
> > > I was surprised to see, after running diskdrake, that those entries had
> > > disappeared from fstab.
> > > PS I use the ofl fashioned fstab, with entries like
> > >      /dev/hda10 /tmp ext3 defaults 1 2
> > > none of the new fangled entries like
> > >      # Entry for /dev/sda1 :
> > >      UUID=8b724c96-bfd9-4751-b852-16641fa7559b /toto ext3
> > > relatime,umask=0 1 2
> >
> > Not for nothin' so what you are saying is that the configuration GUI
> > strong-armed your fstab?  And that at least irritates you?  Just asking.
>
> It leaves me less than completely gruntled.
>
> > You would prefer it just did as you instructed?  I'm not saying anything,
> > just saying.  
>
> Yes, I jolly well would; or at least that it warned me that it was removing
> entries.
>
> > On a happier note, I think it makes a backup of the file
> > when it does things like that.  It should be named
> > fstab.diskdrak.,something.  I would be surprised if this is not the case,
> > as the other config files seem to follow this convention.
>
> No such file in /etc  ;-4(
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ron.

In an older version of Mandrake, I would create one for resolv.conf, as it got
mangled (not really mangled as "corrected") on re-boot.  This has been fixed
though.  A good future work around probably would be to mark the drive as
no-auto so it is ignored by both the mounter and big brother.  I would think  
deleting commented entries was a design decision to cut down on clutter.  If
you place a general purpose comment into fstab, is it also deleted?

--
Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness, consideration
and co-operation can finally lead men to the dawn of eternal peace.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

[Renaud (Ron) Olgiati]

On Monday 08 September 2008, my mailbox was graced by a missive
 from Mike Grello <mgrello@...> who wrote:

>  If you place a general purpose comment into fstab, is it also deleted?

Inside the body of fstab, yes; as the last line, no.
 
Cheers,
 
Ron.
--
                        Nous avons tous assez de force
                      pour supporter les maux d'autrui.
                              -- Duc de Larochefoucault
                                   
                   -- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --

[Jim Beard-3]

Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote:
> Before running diskdrake, I had in /etc/fstab a couple entries that were
> commented out, as the relevant HD is out of the box.
>
> I was surprised to see, after running diskdrake, that those entries had
> disappeared from fstab.

This has been standard for diskdrake for years now.  Either keep
a *.bak file or be prepared to restore from backup any time mcc
or diskdrake touches the fstab.  Exactly what it will "clean up"
and why remains undeciphered by yours truly, but it will usually
do something.

Cheers!

jim b.

--
UNIX is not user unfriendly; it merely
      expects users to be computer-friendly.