disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10? - SUN

This is a discussion on disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10? - SUN ; I have a Sun Blade 1000 with Solaris9 on one disk and Solaris10 on another. When I am booted in one, can I mount the slices of the other disk/OS without danger of corrupting them? How do I name them? ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

  1. disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    I have a Sun Blade 1000 with Solaris9 on one disk and Solaris10 on
    another. When I am booted in one, can I mount the slices of the other
    disk/OS without danger of corrupting them?

    How do I name them? The second installation - Solaris9 - chose
    different names for the disks than the Solaris10 installation, and
    now I can't find the Solaris10 slices when I'm booted in 9 (but I
    can boot both).

  2. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:33:11 +0200 unix_fan wrote:
    > I have a Sun Blade 1000 with Solaris9 on one disk and Solaris10 on
    > another. When I am booted in one, can I mount the slices of the other
    > disk/OS without danger of corrupting them?


    yes.

    > How do I name them? The second installation - Solaris9 - chose
    > different names for the disks than the Solaris10 installation, and
    > now I can't find the Solaris10 slices when I'm booted in 9 (but I
    > can boot both).


    'format' will show you what disks are available, and the partition
    table as well if you need that.

    -frank

  3. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 09:10:19 -0700, Frank Cusack wrote:

    > On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:33:11 +0200 unix_fan wrote:
    >> I have a Sun Blade 1000 with Solaris9 on one disk and Solaris10 on
    >> another. When I am booted in one, can I mount the slices of the other
    >> disk/OS without danger of corrupting them?

    >
    > yes.




    Good, thank you.


    >> How do I name them? The second installation - Solaris9 - chose
    >> different names for the disks than the Solaris10 installation, and
    >> now I can't find the Solaris10 slices when I'm booted in 9 (but I
    >> can boot both).

    >
    > 'format' will show you what disks are available, and the partition
    > table as well if you need that.
    >
    > -frank


    format only shows the currently booted one (solaris9), not the solaris10
    disks.
    bash-2.05# format
    Searching for disks...done


    AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS:
    0. c0t4d0
    /pci@8,700000/scsi@6/sd@4,0
    Specify disk (enter its number): ^C^C
    Specify disk (enter its number): 0


    The only other candidate in /devices yields:

    bash-2.05# mount -r $PWD/./SUNW,qlc@4/fp@0,0/ssd@w21000004cf72784e,0:h /mnt
    mount: /devices/pci@8,600000/./SUNW,qlc@4/fp@0,0/ssd@w21000004cf72784e,0:h no such device


    It's almost like I have to turn it on, or something.



  4. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On 2007-03-25 17:27:42 +0100, unix_fan said:

    > format only shows the currently booted one (solaris9), not the solaris10
    > disks.


    Chances are that you installed the machine with only one disk attached
    (or turned on). You need to do a devfsadm to get it to find the other
    disk & build appropriate device entries for it (obviously with both
    disks connected and turned on!).

    --tim

    PS I think you posted an identical query to this in comp.unix.solaris.
    I fyou want to ask in multiple groups it's better (more polite!) to do
    so by cross-posting as most newsreaders will then only show the article
    once. Otherwise people end up seeing it multiple times, which causes
    annoyance leading to high blood pressure & inevitable death.


  5. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:27:27 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:

    > On 2007-03-25 17:27:42 +0100, unix_fan said:
    >
    >> format only shows the currently booted one (solaris9), not the solaris10
    >> disks.

    >
    > Chances are that you installed the machine with only one disk attached
    > (or turned on). You need to do a devfsadm to get it to find the other
    > disk & build appropriate device entries for it (obviously with both
    > disks connected and turned on!).
    >
    > --tim



    Thank you. Very succinct and yet detailed help.


    >
    > PS I think you posted an identical query to this in comp.unix.solaris.
    > I fyou want to ask in multiple groups it's better (more polite!) to do
    > so by cross-posting as most newsreaders will then only show the article
    > once. Otherwise people end up seeing it multiple times, which causes
    > annoyance leading to high blood pressure & inevitable death.




    Sorry. It was an accident.

    .... if I manage to avoid doing it in the future, will we avoid that
    inevitable death?





  6. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:27:27 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:

    > On 2007-03-25 17:27:42 +0100, unix_fan said:
    >
    >> format only shows the currently booted one (solaris9), not the solaris10
    >> disks.

    >
    > Chances are that you installed the machine with only one disk attached
    > (or turned on). You need to do a devfsadm to get it to find the other
    > disk & build appropriate device entries for it (obviously with both
    > disks connected and turned on!).
    >
    > --tim



    Yes, you're right, that was an important fact that I neglected to
    supply and that you deduced (that I'd installed with just 1 disk) and
    your suggestion did the trick, thank you.

    Actually, I'd tried devfstab before posting but I was expecting it to
    add some new /dev/dsk entries, which didn't appear. I didn't realize
    until trying again after your response that it just enlivens the seemingly
    dead other device that's there.

  7. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 21:52:27 +0200, unix_fan wrote:

    > On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:27:27 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:
    >
    >> On 2007-03-25 17:27:42 +0100, unix_fan said:
    >>
    >>> format only shows the currently booted one (solaris9), not the solaris10
    >>> disks.

    >>
    >> Chances are that you installed the machine with only one disk attached
    >> (or turned on). You need to do a devfsadm to get it to find the other
    >> disk & build appropriate device entries for it (obviously with both
    >> disks connected and turned on!).
    >>
    >> --tim

    >
    >
    > Yes, you're right, that was an important fact that I neglected to
    > supply and that you deduced (that I'd installed with just 1 disk) and
    > your suggestion did the trick, thank you.
    >
    > Actually, I'd tried devfstab before posting but I was expecting it to
    > add some new /dev/dsk entries, which didn't appear. I didn't realize
    > until trying again after your response that it just enlivens the seemingly
    > dead other device that's there.



    Oh no! I forgot to cross post this back to comp.unix.solaris! Now I
    don't know what to do! People should be able to read the solution...


  8. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On 2007-03-25 20:38:32 +0100, unix_fan said:

    > Sorry. It was an accident.


    I know, it usually is, but people do like to complain. My newsreader
    doesn't even handle crossposts properly, but I still complain...

    >
    > ... if I manage to avoid doing it in the future, will we avoid that
    > inevitable death?


    During the heyday of usenet, brain fever due to fury caused by
    complaining about poor netiquette was the leading cause of death among
    sysadmins.


  9. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 21:36:43 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:

    > On 2007-03-25 20:38:32 +0100, unix_fan said:
    >
    >> Sorry. It was an accident.

    >
    > I know, it usually is, but people do like to complain. My newsreader
    > doesn't even handle crossposts properly, but I still complain...
    >
    >>
    >> ... if I manage to avoid doing it in the future, will we avoid that
    >> inevitable death?

    >
    > During the heyday of usenet, brain fever due to fury caused by
    > complaining about poor netiquette was the leading cause of death among
    > sysadmins.



    But when you look at what goes on in the linux groups, you surely pine
    for the good-old days!



  10. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Mar 25, 12:55 pm, unix_fan wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 21:52:27 +0200, unix_fan wrote:
    > > On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:27:27 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:

    >
    > >> On 2007-03-25 17:27:42 +0100, unix_fan said:

    >
    > >>> format only shows the currently booted one (solaris9), not the solaris10
    > >>> disks.

    >
    > >> Chances are that you installed the machine with only one disk attached
    > >> (or turned on). You need to do a devfsadm to get it to find the other
    > >> disk & build appropriate device entries for it (obviously with both
    > >> disks connected and turned on!).

    >
    > >> --tim

    >
    > > Yes, you're right, that was an important fact that I neglected to
    > > supply and that you deduced (that I'd installed with just 1 disk) and
    > > your suggestion did the trick, thank you.

    >
    > > Actually, I'd tried devfstab before posting but I was expecting it to
    > > add some new /dev/dsk entries, which didn't appear. I didn't realize
    > > until trying again after your response that it just enlivens the seemingly
    > > dead other device that's there.

    > Oh no! I forgot to cross post this back to comp.unix.solaris! Now I
    > don't know what to do! People should be able to read the solution...


    Not a bad idea. The number of posts which say something like
    "Thank you that solved my problem" (with no context) when several
    proposed
    only one of which is half valid is a disturbing kink in Usenet
    postings lately : >

    Post the solution! At least as you understand it. Clarification might
    be in order.
    In this case devfsadm not "devfstab" may have saved the day but
    typically
    when you add new hardware (like a SCSI disk) you have to power down to
    do it.
    So you could have done a :
    # touch /reconfigure
    before you shut the machine down. Any added and supported hardware
    will get slotted in as it were when you power back up.


  11. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:19:41 -0700, gerryt wrote:

    > when you add new hardware (like a SCSI disk) you have to power down to
    > do it.
    > So you could have done a :
    > # touch /reconfigure
    > before you shut the machine down. Any added and supported hardware
    > will get slotted in as it were when you power back up.



    Oh, that would have saved a lot of effort. Thank you.


  12. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 21:36:43 +0100,
    Tim Bradshaw , in
    wrote:

    >+ During the heyday of usenet, brain fever due to fury caused by
    >+ complaining about poor netiquette was the leading cause of death among
    >+ sysadmins.


    Widely reported, but never confirmed.

    It has been the reported cause of severe LARTings conducted against
    particularly clueless users.

    --
    Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
    I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow
    isn't looking good, either.
    I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated.

  13. Re: disks mountable under both Solaris9 and Solaris10?

    / (/dev/dsk/c1t0d0s0 ): 9723118 blocks 2167431 files
    /devices (/devices ): 0 blocks 0 files
    /system/contract (ctfs ): 0 blocks 2147483626 files
    /proc (proc ): 0 blocks 29934 files
    /etc/mnttab (mnttab ): 0 blocks 0 files
    /etc/svc/volatile (swap ):12803392 blocks 295012 files
    /system/object (objfs ): 0 blocks 2147483516 files
    /platform/sun4u-us3/lib/libc_psr.so.1(/platform/sun4u-us3/lib/libc_psr/libc_psr_hwcap1.so.1): 9723118 blocks 2167431 files
    /platform/sun4u-us3/lib/sparcv9/libc_psr.so.1(/platform/sun4u-us3/lib/sparcv9/libc_psr/libc_psr_hwcap1.so.1): 9723118 blocks 2167431 files
    /dev/fd (fd ): 0 blocks 0 files
    /tmp (swap ):12803392 blocks 295012 files
    /var/run (swap ):12803392 blocks 295012 files
    /spare (/dev/dsk/c1t0d0s2 ):88635568 blocks 5340605 files


    this my df command how do i mount the disk

+ Reply to Thread