Hi everybody
When I try to create a partition of 2GB using fdisk or parted, I get the
error "File size limit exceeded (core dumped)". I already read about this
error on the mailing list, but sadly not of any solution.
Has anybody got one?
Btw: If happend with fdisk from util-linux-2.10f until util-linux-2.11l.
P.S. I'm not subscribed to the list bla bla bla (but read it rather
often).
Bye
Tim
> When I try to create a partition of 2GB using fdisk or parted, I get the
> error "File size limit exceeded (core dumped)". I already read about this
> error on the mailing list, but sadly not of any solution.
Make sure you have limits set right and a new enough glibc.
Hi!
This is MeToo(tm) message. Limits set to unlimited, glibc-2.2.2 compiled
against 2.4.0 headers.
Booting into 2.4.10-ac10 kernel problem "solved".
> When I try to create a partition of 2GB using fdisk or parted, I get the
> error "File size limit exceeded (core dumped)". I already read about this
> error on the mailing list, but sadly not of any solution.
>
> Has anybody got one?
>
> Btw: If happend with fdisk from util-linux-2.10f until util-linux-2.11l.
Looking forward to proper fix.
Cheers,
Vita
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:27:44 +0100 (BST)
Alan Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> > When I try to create a partition of 2GB using fdisk or parted, I get
the
> > error "File size limit exceeded (core dumped)". I already read about
this
> > error on the mailing list, but sadly not of any solution.
>
> Make sure you have limits set right and a new enough glibc.
I'm using a Red Hat 6.2 system with glibc 2.1.3 (glibc-2.1.3-22), the
latest for Red Hat 6.2. Switching to 7.x would mean to upgrade the whole
system, I guess I can't just take the glibc rpm out of 7.x and everything
still runs fine?
So that means I'm really fucked?
Bye
Tim
> I'm using a Red Hat 6.2 system with glibc 2.1.3 (glibc-2.1.3-22), the
> latest for Red Hat 6.2. Switching to 7.x would mean to upgrade the whole
> system, I guess I can't just take the glibc rpm out of 7.x and everything
> still runs fine?
>
> So that means I'm really fucked?
glibc 2.1.x has minimal support for 64bit file size handling. You probably
need to build 64bit aware tools. You might also be hitting a device bug that
seems to be in Linus kernel where devices are inheriting the file size limit
of the underlying fs the /dev node is on. However I thought that was long
fixed.
Works here, I just created a 130GB partition using 2.4.12.
glibc-2.2.4 running on debian.
Gerhard
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Vitezslav Samel wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This is MeToo(tm) message. Limits set to unlimited, glibc-2.2.2 compiled
> against 2.4.0 headers.
> Booting into 2.4.10-ac10 kernel problem "solved".
>
> > When I try to create a partition of 2GB using fdisk or parted, I get the
> > error "File size limit exceeded (core dumped)". I already read about this
> > error on the mailing list, but sadly not of any solution.
> >
> > Has anybody got one?
> >
> > Btw: If happend with fdisk from util-linux-2.10f until util-linux-2.11l.
>
> Looking forward to proper fix.
>
> Cheers,
> Vita
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
Gerhard Mack
[email protected]
<>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:01:37 +0100 (BST)
Alan Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> glibc 2.1.x has minimal support for 64bit file size handling. You
probably
> need to build 64bit aware tools. You might also be hitting a device bug
that
> seems to be in Linus kernel where devices are inheriting the file size
limit
> of the underlying fs the /dev node is on. However I thought that was
long
> fixed.
>
The latter seems to be the case because Vita Samel (hope I got this right)
just reported that "Booting into 2.4.10-ac10" fixed the problem. Perhaps
it once was fixed and later defixed?
Bye
Tim
> The latter seems to be the case because Vita Samel (hope I got this right)
> just reported that "Booting into 2.4.10-ac10" fixed the problem. Perhaps
> it once was fixed and later defixed?
Sounds like it. I'll have a look some point next week to see if I can see
what is up
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > The latter seems to be the case because Vita Samel (hope I got this right)
> > just reported that "Booting into 2.4.10-ac10" fixed the problem. Perhaps
> > it once was fixed and later defixed?
>
> Sounds like it. I'll have a look some point next week to see if I can see
> what is up
I'm able fdisk/mke2fs with 2.4.13-pre6 without the error so long as I
don't touch the device with hdparm.
--
=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
[email protected]
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Developer/Project Lead
Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/
[email protected]
=====================================================================
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:28:05 -0400 (EDT)
"Mohammad A. Haque" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > The latter seems to be the case because Vita Samel (hope I got this
right)
> > > just reported that "Booting into 2.4.10-ac10" fixed the problem.
Perhaps
> > > it once was fixed and later defixed?
> >
> > Sounds like it. I'll have a look some point next week to see if I can
see
> > what is up
>
> I'm able fdisk/mke2fs with 2.4.13-pre6 without the error so long as I
> don't touch the device with hdparm.
Well I do use hdparm -d 1 /dev/hda in init to set dma to 1. I know called
hdparm -d 0 /dev/hda and tried again, but it still fails. Do you mean
hdparm should not touch the device at all and a reboot without the hdparm
-d 1 /dev/hda would do the job? I could live with that for the moment, as
I don't have to repartition my drive very often...
Bye
Tim
>
> --
>
> =====================================================================
> Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
> [email protected]
>
> "Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Developer/Project Lead
> Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/
> [email protected]
> =====================================================================
>
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Tim Tassonis wrote:
> > I'm able fdisk/mke2fs with 2.4.13-pre6 without the error so long as I
> > don't touch the device with hdparm.
>
> Well I do use hdparm -d 1 /dev/hda in init to set dma to 1. I know called
> hdparm -d 0 /dev/hda and tried again, but it still fails. Do you mean
> hdparm should not touch the device at all and a reboot without the hdparm
> -d 1 /dev/hda would do the job? I could live with that for the moment, as
> I don't have to repartition my drive very often...
Exactly. At least that's what I'm seeing here.
--
=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
[email protected]
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Developer/Project Lead
Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/
[email protected]
=====================================================================
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Tim Tassonis wrote:
> Well I do use hdparm -d 1 /dev/hda in init to set dma to 1. I know called
> hdparm -d 0 /dev/hda and tried again, but it still fails. Do you mean
> hdparm should not touch the device at all and a reboot without the hdparm
> -d 1 /dev/hda would do the job? I could live with that for the moment, as
> I don't have to repartition my drive very often...
>
Woops. hit send too fast.
You can use hdparm once you've repartitioned though it seems. Still
won't be able create any files >2GB once you've touched it with hdparm
again but at least you'll be up and running with whatever size
partitions you want and have dma enabled. Dunno if that's an issue.
--
=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
[email protected]
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Developer/Project Lead
Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/
[email protected]
=====================================================================
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001 12:42:27 -0400 (EDT)
"Mohammad A. Haque" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Tim Tassonis wrote:
>
> > Well I do use hdparm -d 1 /dev/hda in init to set dma to 1. I know
called
> > hdparm -d 0 /dev/hda and tried again, but it still fails. Do you mean
> > hdparm should not touch the device at all and a reboot without the
hdparm
> > -d 1 /dev/hda would do the job? I could live with that for the moment,
as
> > I don't have to repartition my drive very often...
> >
>
> Woops. hit send too fast.
>
> You can use hdparm once you've repartitioned though it seems. Still
> won't be able create any files >2GB once you've touched it with hdparm
> again but at least you'll be up and running with whatever size
> partitions you want and have dma enabled. Dunno if that's an issue.
I'm quite suprised, but this actually worked for me. Rebooted without
using hdparm, created the partintion (3GB) and everything seems ok. Looks
as if hdparm is doing something wrong here (v3.6).
Bye
Tim
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Tim Tassonis wrote:
> I'm quite suprised, but this actually worked for me. Rebooted without
> using hdparm, created the partintion (3GB) and everything seems ok. Looks
> as if hdparm is doing something wrong here (v3.6).
>
More than likely it's just triggering something that causes the problem.
--
=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
[email protected]
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Developer/Project Lead
Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/
[email protected]
=====================================================================
> > > The latter seems to be the case because Vita Samel (hope I got this right)
> > > just reported that "Booting into 2.4.10-ac10" fixed the problem. Perhaps
> > > it once was fixed and later defixed?
> >
> > Sounds like it. I'll have a look some point next week to see if I can see
> > what is up
>
> I'm able fdisk/mke2fs with 2.4.13-pre6 without the error so long as I
> don't touch the device with hdparm.
I have SCSI only system. My problems were with mke2fs >2GiB, but no
problems with fdisk (tried to fdisk/mke2fs my shiny new 40GiB Seagate SCSI
disk).
Vita Samel
In article <[email protected]>,
Mohammad A. Haque <[email protected]> wrote:
| On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Tim Tassonis wrote:
|
| > I'm quite suprised, but this actually worked for me. Rebooted without
| > using hdparm, created the partintion (3GB) and everything seems ok. Looks
| > as if hdparm is doing something wrong here (v3.6).
| >
|
| More than likely it's just triggering something that causes the problem.
I haven't seen any problem, either. Certainly not with fdisk, this is
what I see:
================================================================
bilbo:root> hdparm -V
hdparm v3.9
bilbo:root> df
Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda3 995896 849248 95240 90% /
/dev/hda4 4597818 2727382 1639502 62% /extra
/extra/u_local 193687 74214 109473 40% /usr/local
/dev/hde1 4079656 3611952 262908 93% /extra2
bilbo:root> fdisk /dev/hde
The number of cylinders for this disk is set to 39770.
There is nothing wrong with that, but this is larger than 1024,
and could in certain setups cause problems with:
1) software that runs at boot time (e.g., old versions of LILO)
2) booting and partitioning software from other OSs
(e.g., DOS FDISK, OS/2 FDISK)
Command (m for help): p
Disk /dev/hde: 16 heads, 63 sectors, 39770 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 1008 * 512 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hde1 1 8127 4095976+ 83 Linux native
/dev/hde2 8128 28445 10240272 83 Linux native
Command (m for help): q
================================================================
I certainly have used hdparm on that drive, my controller comes up in
ATA33 by default, and I run
# enable the ATA/66 hard drive(s)
# experiment with -u1 after backup
hdparm -d1 -X66 /dev/hde
out of rc.local to get it going. BP6 m/b, dual Celeron500,
Linux bilbo 2.4.10-ac7-2 #5 SMP Sun Oct 7 08:03:37 EDT 2001 i686 unknown
from the uname. This is NOT a preempt kernel, the patch against this one
blew up on SMP, although it booted "nosmp" just fine. I have trying
again with 2.4.13-pre6 this weekend.
Don't know if this sheds light on the topic, I certainly do run fdisk on
"drives" my RAID controller creates which have 600GB or so broken into
little 100GB files.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
His first management concern is not solving the problem, but covering
his ass. If he lived in the middle ages he'd wear his codpiece backward.
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, bill davidsen wrote:
> I haven't seen any problem, either. Certainly not with fdisk, this is
> what I see:
> ================================================================
> bilbo:root> hdparm -V
> hdparm v3.9
>
> bilbo:root> df
> ....
>
> Don't know if this sheds light on the topic, I certainly do run fdisk on
> "drives" my RAID controller creates which have 600GB or so broken into
> little 100GB files.
I guess it was unclear at first. You'll only get the error when you run
mke2fs.
--
=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
[email protected]
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Developer/Project Lead
Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/
[email protected]
=====================================================================
On 25 Oct 2001, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, bill davidsen wrote:
>
> > I haven't seen any problem, either. Certainly not with fdisk, this is
> > what I see:
> > ================================================================
> > bilbo:root> hdparm -V
> > hdparm v3.9
> >
> > bilbo:root> df
> > ....
> >
> > Don't know if this sheds light on the topic, I certainly do run fdisk on
> > "drives" my RAID controller creates which have 600GB or so broken into
> > little 100GB files.
>
> I guess it was unclear at first. You'll only get the error when you run
> mke2fs.
I still am missing this, obviously after I partition the drive I do mke2fs
so I can use the partition. I don't see what sequence you follow which
triggers this, can you clarify?
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> I still am missing this, obviously after I partition the drive I do mke2fs
> so I can use the partition. I don't see what sequence you follow which
> triggers this, can you clarify?
I thought i already sent you (maybe it was to someone else in private
email) the steps/cases that succeed/fail. I'll dig up the email if
not.
What version of glibc are you compiled against? I've got 2.1.3. it could
also be controller specific. I tried it on a HPT366. Haven't tried it on
my onboard (440bx motherboard).
I've only seen one confirmation on the list that duplicates what I'm
seeing.
More info later.
--
=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/
[email protected]
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Developer/Project Lead
Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://www.themes.org/
[email protected]
=====================================================================