• Recent
    • Unsolved
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Omanimous
    3. Best
    O
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 5
    • Posts 16
    • Best 3
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    Best posts made by Omanimous

    • RE: Dell E6410 - Solid State Drive (SSD) Compatibility

      @Sebastian-Roth I’ll double check. I have a computer ready to be sent up.

      I will, using an HDD:

      • Create a Non-Resizable test image shrunken to a 60GB partition.
      • Create a new Resizable test image with the drive expanded all the way out.

      @Tom-Elliott I see what you mean about the ls -l now. I double checked another image that is resizable and it has:

      [root@fog images]# ls -la DO755U
      total 14612492
      drwxrwxrwx   2 root root        4096 Feb 17 14:05 .
      drwxrwxrwx. 57 fog  root        4096 Mar 16 10:21 ..
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root           2 Feb 17 14:03 d1.fixed_size_partitions
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root          15 Feb 17 14:03 d1.original.fstypes
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root         259 Feb 17 14:03 d1.original.partitions
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root           0 Feb 17 14:03 d1.original.swapuuids
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root     8588271 Feb 17 14:05 rec.img.000
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root 14954576482 Feb 17 14:44 sys.img.000
      [root@fog images]#
      

      I am very positive that it was resizable, but I’ll stop dwelling on that and let you know how this works after I send the images up and down.

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      O
      Omanimous
    • RE: Dell E6410 - Solid State Drive (SSD) Compatibility
      [root@fog images]# ls -al /images/DLE6410TU
      total 17997404
      drwxrwxrwx   2 root root        4096 Mar 16 09:10 .
      drwxrwxrwx. 57 fog  root        4096 Mar 16 10:21 ..
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root         512 Mar 16 09:10 d1.mbr
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root     8566104 Mar 16 09:10 d1p1.img
      -rwxrwxrwx   1 root root 18420750512 Mar 16 10:21 d1p2.img
      [root@fog images]#
      

      Should also point out the Server is running on CentOS 6.7 (Final).

      @george1421

      1. FOG Version: 1.2.0 Stable Release (Department a little too scared to rely on beta.)
      2. Disk Structure: Single Disk - Resizable. (I am using this one, but I have also seen in a few other posts about it not having too much of an effect.)
      3. We’re using undionly.kkpxe, not undionly.kpxe - we upgraded a few months back and .kkpxe was the one most of our machines liked.

      @Sebastian-Roth

      I will take a look at the debug after in a while and post the results here. Currently building an image to test the Multiple Partition - Non Resizable and while that is busy uploading I will debug.


      Update – 2: Editing again for lsblk

      [root@10 /]# lsblk
      NAME    MAJ:MIN  RM    SIZE   RO  TYPE  MOUNTPOINT
      sda       8:0     0  119.2G    0  disk
      |-sda1    8:1     0    300M    0  part
      `-sda2    8:2     0    119G    0  part
      

      Update: I ran the debug, but I cannot say that I like the results; I cannot read too much of CLI, but if fdisk -l sees the drive as /dev/sda, and FOG does not see the drive at all, then is there a problem with FOG?

      
      [root@10 /]# fogpartinfo --list-devices
      Error: Can't have a partition outside the disk!
      
      [root@10 /]# fogpartinfo --list-parts /dev/sda
      Error: Can't have a partition outside the disk!
      
      [root@10 /]# fdisk -l
      
      Disk /dev/sda: 119.2GiB, 128035676160 bytes, 250069680 sectors
      Units: sectors of 1 = 512 * 512 bytes
      Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
      I/O size (minimal/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
      Disklabel type: dos
      Disk identifier: 0x9deac661
      
      Device     Boot          Start          End          Blocks     Id System
      /dev/sda1  *              2048       616447          307200      7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
      /dev/sda2               616448    488392703       243008128      7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
      
      

      If this helps in any way, we are using (attempting to use) the following SSDs in our computers (What is supplied through our contact):

      • Samsung - SSD 128 GB (6.0Gbps) 2.5" [Model: MZ-7PC128D] {P/N: MZ7PC128HAFU-000D1}
      • Micron - SSD 128 GB (6.0Gbps) 2.5" [HP P/N): 652181-001] {(HP Model)P/N:MTFDDAK128MAM-1J1}
        • Micron is what I am currently testing this on - client wise.
      • Samsung - SSD 128 GB (3.0Gbps) 2.5" [Model:MZ-7PA1280/0D1] {P/N:MZ7PA128HMCD-010D1}
      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      O
      Omanimous
    • RE: Dell E6410 - Solid State Drive (SSD) Compatibility

      Well, now I feel dumb.

      I don’t get it:

      • Took the image fine when going from an HDD-to-SSD non-resizable.
      • Took the image fine when going from an HDD-to-SSD resizable.
      • Took the image fine when going from an SSD-to-SSD resizable.

      Something messed up some where and now I am feeling that it was user error (I AM STILL SAYING IT WAS RESIZABLE!) when I originally made the image, but it just doesn’t make sense.

      I mean, technically speaking if it was a non-resizable image, then it wouldn’t be an out of partition thing because the very first time I made an image for these computers was with the one going from a 128GB SSD to a 128GB SSD (without knowing the SSD was my source disk.) Why it works now, I don’t know.

      I even tested going from a resizable image shot down to the SSD, which was then shot up to a test image, then shot right back down to that computer, and it works. The only possible thing left to try, that would still probably yield it working fine, is uploading from an SSD, downloading to a HDD, and uploading again, and then downloading to an SSD - I did this before, but it just doesn’t make sense to go back and test it if the other ones have worked.

      @Tom-Elliott @Sebastian-Roth @george1421 I don’t know, if nothing else thanks for showing me something new with FOG I didn’t know (debug and image structure.)

      posted in Hardware Compatibility
      O
      Omanimous
    • 1 / 1