Thank you for your donation!


how to attach local drive
#21
Hi,
It is a RPI4 with 2GB ram. I put some system reply what I know below, but is it a compete system info query in moOde?

Anyway, now,
Step1, I flashed another sdcard, than scanned the local drive. I did not expanded the file system.
It scanned it all fine.
Step2, now the network drive scan is running.

Step3, I will reflesh the card, but before I scan any drive, I expand the file system.

Thanks!
JG


pi@moode:/var/log/mpd $ lscpu
Architecture:        armv7l
Byte Order:          Little Endian
CPU(s):              4
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-3
Thread(s) per core:  1
Core(s) per socket:  4
Socket(s):           1
Vendor ID:           ARM
Model:               3
Model name:          Cortex-A72
Stepping:            r0p3
CPU max MHz:         1500.0000
CPU min MHz:         600.0000
BogoMIPS:            180.00
Flags:               half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpv4 idiva idivt vfpd32 lpae evtstrm crc32
pi@moode:/var/log/mpd $ lsblk
NAME        MAJ:MIN RM  SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT
sda           8:0    0  3.7T  0 disk
`-sda1        8:1    0  3.7T  0 part /media/zeneM
mmcblk0     179:0    0  7.2G  0 disk
|-mmcblk0p1 179:1    0  256M  0 part /boot
`-mmcblk0p2 179:2    0  3.4G  0 part /
pi@moode:/var/log/mpd $ lsusb
Bus 002 Device 002: ID 1058:2620 Western Digital Technologies, Inc.
Bus 002 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0003 Linux Foundation 3.0 root hub
Bus 001 Device 002: ID 2109:3431 VIA Labs, Inc. Hub
Bus 001 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0002 Linux Foundation 2.0 root hub
Reply
#22
I forgot to mention power. Yes, I did tried with a lab psu to header with 5.5V. It did not make any difference.
It is not a power issue.
Reply
#23
Step2 is positive also. Network drive scanned fine too.
Both local and nas folder is shown and browseable fine. After reboot too.

Now I do step3, refleshing the sdcard again, but now, before I scan the folders, I will expand the file system.

Now it is : 
i@moode:~ $ df -h
Filesystem                     Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/root                      3.4G  2.7G  572M  83% /
devtmpfs                       901M     0  901M   0% /dev
tmpfs                          934M     0  934M   0% /dev/shm
tmpfs                          934M  9.4M  925M   2% /run
tmpfs                          5.0M  4.0K  5.0M   1% /run/lock
tmpfs                          934M     0  934M   0% /sys/fs/cgroup
/dev/mmcblk0p1                 253M   55M  198M  22% /boot
/dev/sda1                      3.6T  3.1T  405G  89% /media/zeneM
//192.168.2.21/ellenorizetlen  5.5T  2.7T  2.8T  49% /mnt/NAS/ellenorizetlen
//192.168.2.21/zene            5.5T  2.7T  2.8T  49% /mnt/NAS/zene
tmpfs                          187M     0  187M   0% /run/user/1000


Regards,
JG
Reply
#24
so now, I did step 3 and I have it working fine with expanded file system.

I do not know what was wrong. When it is wrong, it comes in the exact same position and it is repeatable until I wipe and reflash the sd card.
Than it does not matter if it is the local or nas folder. For sure it is not the material in the folders.
Another suspect I have, all these copies I did with dd under linux. Before I have used others also, I thought with same result, but I'm not sure any more. Maybe I should do a flash with win32disk imager or balnea, but I'm tired of it now. I start to use it as it is and see. I hope it does not come back. On the other hand, all the evening I went straight to update (after file system expand in the 3rd case), and did not play with it much.

Maybe tomorrow I will test with balnea, just to see, it would be good to know what is causing this, so it would be reliable than.

Thanks a lot,
JG
Reply
#25
(09-07-2020, 09:40 PM)Giordano Wrote: so now, I did step 3 and I have it working fine with expanded file system.

I do not know what was wrong. When it is wrong, it comes in the exact same position and it is repeatable until I wipe and reflash the sd card.
Than it does not matter if it is the local or nas folder. For sure it is not the material in the folders.
Another suspect I have, all these copies I did with dd under linux. Before I have used others also, I thought with same result, but I'm not sure any more. Maybe I should do a flash with win32disk imager or balnea, but I'm tired of it now. I start to use it as it is and see. I hope it does not come back. On the other hand, all the evening I went straight to update (after file system expand in the 3rd case), and did not play with it much.

Maybe tomorrow I will test with balnea, just to see, it would be good to know what is causing this, so it would be reliable than.

Thanks a lot,
JG

Hello Giordano,
my recommendation: before a new image is installed on the SD card, the SD card should be formatted -> FAT 32 ...
Only then, for example with BalenaEtcher, transfer it to the new formatted SD card ...

Greetings and have a nice day .. Smile
Reply
#26
Hi,
Yes, I did that mistake too :-)
But since that, in win, I have used sdformatter, in linux now, I've removed all partitions, created one big, before dd the image to sdc.
I was tired yesterday, but I was curious and I want it reliable. I think this evening I will make a flashing with win32disk imager if I find another card (now I do not want to wipe the working card).
Regards,
JG
Reply
#27
Balena Etcher eliminates the need to do anything about the format of a uSD card and it verifies the data on the card after it's been written. It's also available for Windows, OsX, and Linux. Sweet.

Using dd to write the image file to a uSD card is a terrible idea. I would use it only if no other method were available...and there's always a better method available.

Be sure you start with a good quality uSD card.

Regards,
Kent
Reply


Forum Jump: