USB flash drive not mounting!
Topic: USB flash drive not mounting!
started by: atermfan
Posted by atermfan on Feb. 27 2007,02:59
Why would it not mount?
Posted by sankarv on Feb. 27 2007,06:31it means that you have SATA hard drive or there is no such partition.
if you have IDE HD try hda1 insteaad of sda1. it will work if hda1 is present.
For SATA support use DSL-N.
Posted by atermfan on Feb. 27 2007,06:53What are you talking about?
I do not have a SATA.
Why would I want to mount hda1 instead of sda1? hda1 is my swap.
I specifically mentioned that it is a USB flash drive in the title.
Posted by sankarv on Feb. 27 2007,09:57myself too sleepy.. i dint see tat.
this is normally the text occurance when device is not detected or incompatible. remove and connect it again properly. it may work
Posted by lucky13 on Feb. 27 2007,10:00
Because the mount point is already set by hotplug. Try this:
sudo mount /mnt/sda1
Alternatively, you can look in /mnt using emelfm (as super user) or ls it in a terminal and make sure hotplug has set the mount point for your flash drive. It should be sda1, sdb1, sdc1, etc., depending how many memory devices you use (with other numbers if any is partitioned). You can then right-click on the mount point and select mount.
Posted by atermfan on Feb. 27 2007,17:13$ sudo mount /mnt/sda1
mount: can't find /mnt/sda1 in /etc/fstab or /etc/mtab
I tried the same thing with /dev/sda1 instead of /mnt/sda1, but did not work either.
USB port and drive are fine. I tested it in Knoppix.
Posted by lucky13 on Feb. 27 2007,18:35
You're going to mount it in /mnt, not /dev.
With the pendrive inserted, type (and paste back):
Posted by atermfan on Feb. 28 2007,03:17sda1 not listed. Only hda1 and hda2 is.
Why is the sda1 not listed?
Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Feb. 28 2007,06:45
Posted by atermfan on Feb. 28 2007,07:18
Did. See my previous post.
Posted by lucky13 on Feb. 28 2007,13:49
Please paste in the output from fdisk -l. While you're at it, show us the output of:
dmesg | grep usb
First look in /mnt in emelfm. Other than hdaX and floppy and cdrom, are there any other mount points?
Give us more info. What brand of device is this? How is it partitioned, what filesystem, etc.? What version of DSL are you using? I found a thread reporting a USB1.1/USB2 glitch in DSL-N RC3:
< http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/dsl-n/f/viewpost/1312.html >
Have you searched through the forum archives for your type of device and the DSL version you're using?
Posted by atermfan on Feb. 28 2007,17:53
auto and sda1
I highly doubt the brand matters. All brands mounts the same way. It worked in Windows, it works for Knoppix, but does not work for this distro. I do not know why, since this distro is based on Knoppix.
1 partition. ext2.
Should behave the same way as DSL, right? DSL-N is just a 2.6 kernel plus a few more apps added to DSL.
Posted by ^thehatsrule^ on Feb. 28 2007,18:05Maybe this will help... first google result: < http://www.mepis.org/node/5860 >
Another result seems to suggest to make sure you are using a usb2 port.
Posted by lucky13 on Feb. 28 2007,23:50
Per the thread I linked about the USB1.1/2 glitch, I thought Robert addressed that issue in RC4. I think that's an issue and hat's suggestion that you make sure your port is USB2 is a good one. So, too, is the link he gave you.
It can be an issue if you have a device with some proprietary filesystem or hidden "partitions" like U3; the U3 thing can be a problem if you format the device and leave the U3 pseudopartition on it. I see you have it formatted for ext2. If it once was a U3 drive and it was repartitioned without using their removal tool, can you get an "fdisk -l" for it using Knoppix or something else under which it'll mount?
Also, Knoppix is about a ~700MB ISO. DSL is 50ish. DSL-N is, what, 90- or 100-something? There's a lot more than KDE that's been removed to make DSL and DSL-N "tighter." Just because it's Knoppix-based doesn't mean it's still Knoppix. It also means that something that works in one won't necessarily work with the other. That's especially true if you're comparing recent Knoppix versions to DSL which is based on Knoppix 3.4 (iirc).
Uh, no. DSL-N is still in testing. The RC stands for release candidate. DSL-N isn't at version 1.0 yet. Are you certain that it's not RC3 (which had a similar issue) and that your ports are USB2?
Posted by atermfan on Mar. 01 2007,22:53
It is a USB2. Tried it with both ports. They are both fine. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the port or the drive.
It is not an U3.
It was preformated in FAT16 when I got it.
Technically speaking, if it had some kind of discriminitive FS, it would not have worked in other distros I have tried. I do not even think developers would go as far as to not make it not work in a specific distro.
Detected by Knoppix 4.0.
Off topic question: Does ext2 automatically sets it to boot? Because I did not set it to boot.
Ports are USB2. Positive.
I downloaded the DSL-N a few days ago. So I assumed it is the latest version (RC4). But then I went to have a second look. And found out something...
This link: < http://damnsmalllinux.org/ >
Says: "DSL-N (DSL's bigger sister) is now at 0.1RC4."
But when I went to this sub-link: < http://damnsmalllinux.org/dsl-n/ >
It says: "DSL-N 0.1RC3 is now ready"
Now I am not so sure which of those links I downloaded from. I popped in the DSL-N CD again to check, but I can not find the version mentioned anywhere. The boot screen says 0.01. That is it; it does not mention which RC.
I tried to find out by looking up the screenshot, but the site only offers the screenshot of the first RC. Google did not yield any results for a DSL-N screenshot.
The DSL-N I got has a coast as a background. Perhaps someone would tell me if I got the RC3 or 4?
It seems very odd how the main DSL site has the latest RC, while the "home page" of DSL-N still has RC3.
Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 02 2007,13:48
Whoa. It would matter a lot if you lacked that particular fs support in your kernel/modules irrespective of distro -- or irrespective even of operating system. Not all distros use the same kernel/module configurations, so it really does matter if a device has some oddball filesystem. Fortunately, yours doesn't.
No, ext2 isn't automatically bootable.
I haven't played with DSL-N much in a while, and the last I burned was RC3. I don't recall if it has the DSL control panel, but that should tell you which version you're running. RC3's fluxbox background is an aerial view of a coastline. I don't know if that was changed in RC4. I'm sure someone will tell you shortly.
It also isn't terribly odd that links on different pages aren't synched. Stuff happens, things can get overlooked. I'm sure that will be addressed now that the issue's been raised.