Karmic and fstab. Anybody having issues?

[Roasted]

I mount several backup drives by fstab with UUID. This process has worked great since I started on Ubuntu.

Installed 9.10 last night, and uh - no go. I just get errors when I try to access the "mounted" shares.

Anybody else having issues? Come to think of it Karmic also failed to acknowledge I had more than 1 other drive in my system when I installed it. It only saw my main backup, not the secondary drive... at all...

[prem1er]

Yes, I am. On bootup I get errors about not being able to mount several of my partitions. I haven't had much time to look into it, but I know this didn't happen about 2 weeks ago with the beta.

[Roasted]

I'm sorry to hear about your luck, but I am happy that I'm not alone.

I'll patiently and quietly wait until Ubuntu developers come up with a patch.

I assume they are aware of the issue?

[slakkie]

The messages on boot is something you can ignore as your partitions are mounted. See bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s...sh/+bug/215666

What fstab errors do you have, could you post them? I've had no problems with my fstab, except for the bug as reported above.

[Roasted]

Well, I added my drives to fstab based on UUID, just like I did in 9.04, 8.10, 8.04, etc without any issues. I reboot and log in. No errors.

But, say I want to access one of the drives I mounted by UUID. I select places, then the drive, and it barfs out an error, something about only root can mount this device. I can't post the exact error because I'm at work now...

It's a definite fstab error with Karmic, I'm afraid. My setup has worked perfectly in 9.04 and previous, and in the Ubuntu IRC chat several people there claimed to have the same issues.

[beachdaze]

Similar problem here. I don't use UUID, but this line in fstab has worked fine since 8.04, but now only gives access to root.

//192.xxx.xxx.xxx/Music /home/<user>/Music cifs auto 0 0

I've tried with user and users, adding a rw and the usual things. This is a shared folder on an XP box, with NO password required. Very strange.

[entropy1]

I have been dual booting 9.04 and Windows Vista. Yesterday I added 9.10 in a new partition that I created in some free space.

In my 9.04 fstab I have the line

/dev/sda3 /media/C ntfs-3g quiet,defaults,rw,uid=myname,gid=myname,fmask=177, dmask=077 0 0

so that when I boot 9.04, the Windows partition is automatically accessible.

I put the same line in my 9.10 fstab, but now the Windows partition does not show up in nautilus; it's like it does not exist. The partition still shows up in gparted.

When I removed the line from the 9.10 fstab and reboot 9.10, the partition shows up in nautilus and I can click on it and it mounts.

I would prefer to do things automatically as I did in 9.04. Does anyone know how?

[Roasted]

http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=5145

Boom....

Reviews on the release candidate of the desktop version are negative, 
due to the fact you can’t run multiple drives with the current code base. 
This means a netbook user may be happy but a desktop user (my desktop has 
three hard drives) will not be satisfied at all.

I definitely didn't get the release candidate, unless that's what was linked on the Ubuntu.com web site under "9.10 is here!" when it was released.

It's all good, though. I'm sure the bugs will be fixed soon. Just wanted to throw this review out there so users knew that there IS something definitely confirmed.

[Roasted]

I booted to the Jaunty 9.04 64 bit LiveCD and the Karmic 9.10 64 bit LiveCD. In each instance, I went to the partitioning screen and selected "manual partition" mode. These are direct screenshots from each instance.

Jaunty:
http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/7...screenshot.png


Karmic:
http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/4...screenshot.png



Jaunty = correct.

Karmic = wtf is happening there? What is dev mapper? Why aren't BOTH of my 250gb drives (sdc and sdd) showing up?

[hadrurus]

Hi

actually i have (had) 2 issued with fstab in 9.10 lately:

1. installed 9.10 along 9.04 and win xp on my laptop, and during boot process (bootspalsh) it was showing info about partitions being unable to mount, thou later on everything was ok. also, when i've changed UUIDs to /dev/sdXX notation i had no more errors.
So, i've decided to repartition a bit mentioned hdd and remove older ubuntu, and after new installation - im not getting any more errors (even thou still using UUIDs
... weird

2. this is a bit strange:
when i mount one of my partitions without any changes to fstab it works. when i change fstab entry to:

UUID=a966f889-a70e-4d35-b58d-4e3312702803 /mnt/docs       ext4    defaults,user,exec,fmask=111,dmask=000        0       2

(adding user,exec,fmask=111,dmask=000 options) it's no longer mounted and syslog says:

Nov  1 09:18:00 Deimos kernel: [   39.038689] EXT4-fs (sda5): barriers enabled
Nov  1 09:18:00 Deimos kernel: [   39.055452] kjournald2 starting: pid 778, dev sda5:8, commit interval 5 seconds
Nov  1 09:18:00 Deimos kernel: [   39.055691] EXT4-fs (sda5): internal journal on sda5:8
Nov  1 09:18:00 Deimos kernel: [   39.055696] EXT4-fs (sda5): delayed allocation enabled
Nov  1 09:18:00 Deimos kernel: [   39.061622] EXT4-fs (sda5): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode
Nov  1 09:13:50 Deimos kernel: [   19.247383]  sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4 < sda5 sda6 >
Nov  1 09:13:50 Deimos kernel: [   27.331876] EXT4-fs (sda5): Unrecognized mount option "fmask=111" or missing value
Nov  1 09:13:50 Deimos kernel: [   27.608208] EXT4-fs (sda5): Unrecognized mount option "fmask=111" or missing value
Nov  1 09:13:50 Deimos kernel: [   30.030409] EXT4-fs (sda5): Unrecognized mount option "fmask=111" or missing value
Nov  1 09:14:07 Deimos kernel: [   46.805934] EXT4-fs (sda5): Unrecognized mount option "fmask=111" or missing value
Nov  1 09:14:25 Deimos kernel: [   64.661794] EXT4-fs (sda5): Unrecognized mount option "fmask=111" or missing value

removing fmask and dmask causes the partiotion to mount witout any problems


regs