hal, ntfs, and 10.0-RC3
Joe Marcus Clarke
marcus at marcuscom.com
Tue Jan 7 00:01:11 UTC 2014
On 1/6/14, 6:23 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus at marcuscom.com
> <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com>> wrote:
>
> On 1/6/14, 5:50 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 11:09 AM, Joe Marcus Clarke
> <marcus at marcuscom.com <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com>
> > <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > On 1/6/14, 1:55 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Joe Marcus Clarke
> > <marcus at marcuscom.com <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com>
> <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com>>
> > > <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com>
> <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com <mailto:marcus at marcuscom.com>>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 1/6/14, 2:01 AM, Alberto Villa wrote:
> > > > 2014/1/6 Kevin Oberman <rkoberman at gmail.com
> <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>
> > <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>>
> > > <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>
> <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>>>>:
> > > >> Since I updated to 10.0-RC3 (from 9), hald no longer
> works with
> > > my ntfs
> > > >> partitions. I can mount them manually with ntfs-3g, but
> > when not
> > > mounted,
> > > >> hal does not see them at all.
> > > >>
> > > >> Might this be fall-out of the removal of ntfs (read-only)
> > > support? I have
> > > >> not looked through the hald sources to see how it
> detects these
> > > slices. I
> > > >> do find it interesting that mounting one NTFS file system
> > causes
> > > all of the
> > > >> other ones appear to hald.
> > > >
> > > > I've done some work on HAL in past months, so I have a
> view
> > on the
> > > matter.
> > > >
> > > > HAL uses sysctl for disks detection, so it's up to the
> > system to list
> > > > all the available drives. I'll try to have a look in next
> > days, but my
> > > > wild guess (since I've not been using ntfs-3g for
> years) is that
> > > > ntfs-3g unloads its module when all mounts are
> removed, thus
> > making
> > > > the drives undetectable again. Is that correct?
> > >
> > > HAL uses libvolume_id to taste the volumes to determine the
> > file system
> > > type. It relies on sysctl to enumerate the disks and
> volumes
> > as you've
> > > pointed out. What does sysctl -b kern.geom.conftxt say?
> Each
> > partition
> > > listed there should go through libvolume_id detection.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> > > Joe,
> > >
> > > Looks good to me, but hald does not seem to see it:
> > >
> > > 0 DISK ada0 750156374016 512 hd 1 sc 63
> > > 1 LABEL diskid/DISK-WD-WX21A61N8718 750156374016 512 i 0 o 0
> > > 2 PART diskid/DISK-WD-WX21A61N8718s4 16833839104 512 i 4 o
> > 733319528448
> > > ty ntfs xs MBR xt 7
> > > 2 PART diskid/DISK-WD-WX21A61N8718s3 241172480000 512 i 3 o
> > 492147048448
> > > ty ebr xs MBR xt 15
> > > 3 PART diskid/DISK-WD-WX21A61N8718s5 241171431424 512 i 1 o
> 1048576 ty
> > > ntfs xs MBREXT xt 7
> > > 2 PART diskid/DISK-WD-WX21A61N8718s2 490887708672 512 i 2 o
> 1259339776
> > > ty ntfs xs MBR xt 7
> > > 2 PART diskid/DISK-WD-WX21A61N8718s1 1258291200 512 i 1 o
> 1048576 ty
> > > ntfs xs MBR xt 7
> > > 1 PART ada0s4 16833839104 512 i 4 o 733319528448 ty ntfs xs
> MBR xt 7
> > > 2 LABEL ntfs/Lenovo_Recovery 16833839104 512 i 0 o 0
> > > 1 PART ada0s3 241172480000 512 i 3 o 492147048448 ty ebr xs
> MBR xt 15
> > > 2 PART ada0s5 241171431424 512 i 1 o 1048576 ty ntfs xs
> MBREXT xt 7
> > > 1 PART ada0s2 490887708672 512 i 2 o 1259339776 ty ntfs xs
> MBR xt 7
> > > 2 LABEL ntfs/Windows7_OS 490887708672 512 i 0 o 0
> > > 1 PART ada0s1 1258291200 512 i 1 o 1048576 ty ntfs xs MBR xt 7
> > > 2 LABEL ntfs/SYSTEM_DRV 1258291200 512 i 0 o 0
> > > # lshal | grep ada0
> > > block.device = '/dev/ada0' (string)
> > > freebsd.device_file = '/dev/ada0' (string)
> > >
> > > So hald sees the disk, but none of the partitions (slices).
> Could
> > the "2
> > > PART ada0s5" be messing things up? The disk has only four
> slices (it's
> > > MBR formatted). I think I will boot Windows and see wat it
> says about
> > > the partitioning.
> > > # gpart show ada0
> > > => 63 1465149105 ada0 MBR (699G)
> > > 63 1985 - free - (993K)
> > > 2048 2457600 1 ntfs (1.2G)
> > > 2459648 958765056 2 ntfs (457G)
> > > 961224704 471040000 3 ebr (225G)
> > > 1432264704 32878592 4 ntfs (16G)
> > > 1465143296 5872 - free - (2.9M)
> > > Slice 1 is the weird SYSTEM_DRV, 2 is Windows7_OS, 3 is an
> exfat file
> > > system named "Media", and 4 is the "Lenovo_Recovery" file
> system. But
> > > geom sees a mysterious fifth one that it says is NTFS???
> Still, a soon
> > > as I mount the seconds slice, hald "sees" all of them.
> > > --
> > > R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
> > > E-mail: rkoberman at gmail.com <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>
> <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>>
> > <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>
> <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com <mailto:rkoberman at gmail.com>>>
> >
> > I don't suppose you have a 9.X output of the conftxt? This is
> one area
> > where HAL could use an update to use confxml or the like.
> It's tied to
> > the output of conftxt and thus the format of it. I have a
> feeling this
> > format is different. I'll have to look over the code...
> >
> > Nope. I'm afraid I blew away my 9 backup yesterday to prep to
> update to
> > RC4. And, to make matters worse, after re-booting, I can no
> longer get
> > my network to run so my system is pretty useless until I can
> figure out
> > what I messed up. (Also had to fix a flat on my bike. Guess it's just
> > not my day.)
> >
> > Using confxml would make a lot of sense, but it does not look like HAL
> > has much of a future. Is it used on MATE? Pretty sure that it is
> not on
> > Gnome3.
>
> In hf-storage.c in hald/freebsd, go to line 431. Change this "if"
> block to:
>
> if ((! strcmp(fields[1], "LABEL") ||
> ! strcmp(fields[1], "BSD") ||
> ! strcmp(fields[1], "PART")) &&
> (! strncmp(fields[2], "ufsid/", strlen("ufsid/")) ||
> ! strncmp(fields[2], "ufs/", strlen("ufs/"))
> ! strncmp(fields[2], "diskid/", strlen("diskid/"))))
>
> Rebuild hal, and see if that helps.
>
> Joe
>
>
> Joe,
>
> Shouldn't there be an OR (||) after the next to last line? (I'm going
> to assume so and build that way.)
Whoops. Yeah, add the ||.
Joe
--
PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
More information about the freebsd-gnome
mailing list