@george1421 For my needs, I’m totally dropping LVM and agree, LVM really doesn’t seem to have a place in images at the moment.
Best posts made by Xipher
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
Latest posts made by Xipher
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
@george1421 For my needs, I’m totally dropping LVM and agree, LVM really doesn’t seem to have a place in images at the moment.
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
@george1421 Close to my findings wherein the first partition (sda1) will grow proportionally, but the rest… no go.
If you create the same layout but have the root partition where you currently have the boot partition, it will grow the root and ‘work’ as it seems it would be intended.
If you were to make a home partition in the same place, it would grow but not the boot or root… etc
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
Ran the two commands in your prior post as root:
wget -O /var/www/fog/service/ipxe/init.xz https://fogproject.org/inits/init.xz
wget -O /var/www/fog/service/ipxe/init_32.xz https://fogproject.org/inits/init_32.xzRecaptured all 3 images, then casted them to the test system one after the other and recorded the results.
Didn’t re-run the installer or anything else, system wasn’t rebooted, etc, pretty much just replaced the init per the above command provided, recaptured, recast.
I could try providing a VM image of one of the systems I’m capturing from that exhibits the issue? Could provide the actual images too.
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
@tom-elliott Sorry it took so long, I put the new init in, but the results were identical sadly :C
Also, totally agree on the SWAP partition issue, its a change I’ll make on the client to capture.
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
Ok, want to break down the results in the same sort of output I’m seeing used here for the source and destination of each attempt
Destination is always a 75gb machine which is always a bigger disk. The ‘smaller disk’ restore issue I think is already identified?
This is the ‘custom’ partitioned layout I was using yesterday which caused a problem:
Source:
Destination:
This is the ‘default’ layout Mint Mate 18.2 produces from its installer when LVM is selected:
Source:
Destination:
This is the ‘working’ solution wherein the root partition is the first partition on the drive:
Source:
Destination:
Something I noticed on all the machines though was that the SWAP partition ONLY mounted on the LVM destination machine…!? All other attempts without LVM lead to the destination machine not mounting its swap, really weird…
Hope this helps understand what I’m running into and I’ll try the patched init today, though I have to run off for a bit at the moment, sorry!
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
@tom-elliott I’ll give it a shot today
Going to post up the screenshots of the output in the same style everyone else is first though to try and help explain and identify the original issue better, want to try and make sure everyone is on the same page by using the same style of output.
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
OK, so, after a fair bit of testing and retesting, here is what I’ve found out.
First of all, the following image gallery I created of the issue explains things well:
The TL;DR version is this:
LVM breaks things something /fierce/ with Mint’s default layout. If you choose to use LVM and don’t set a custom partition layout, what you get from the 18.2 installer is whats in the screenshot and it will not expand properly.
Having the root partition anywhere but as the first and primary partition of the drive makes things break. In my case, the SWAP partition was always first in my images.
Having the root partition as the first and primary partition makes the expansion work, almost 100%, it left some space but its good enough for right now.
Important Note: In my testing tonight I ended up using FOG 1.5 RC5 since I /just/ rebuilt in tonight to do this testing. Prior testing was performed on FOG 1.4.4 which for me was producing stranger results than these.
Is this intended functionality?
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
@george1421 The whole ‘going to a smaller disk’ thing seems to be in relation to offsets being passed that exceed the ‘physical’ dimensions of the drive being restored to, see this prior gallery for the errors related.
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
I was using a 100gb disk in my VM environment when I was testing the 50gb captured drive.
I’m recreating my test environment now virtually, though I do have the following pictures from a more ‘meat-space’ environment I was working with today…
That was testing a 128gb drive to a 320gb drive, the picture on the bottom shows the settings for the image.
Sorry that they’re actual pictures, the system doing the images is not connected to the network, internet, etc and I didn’t have a flash drive to bring back with me at the time.
-
RE: Failure to expand shrunken resizeable image from Linux machines
@george1421 keen to hear what you find! I’ll take some pictures of what I run into myself, source material and what I get in the end.
Also, didn’t mean to sound off color with the Windows comment, just genuine curiosity if I had the wrong idea on things, bad tone on my part.