3

In FreeNAS 9.3, I created a partition (slice?) by doing:

fdisk -BI /dev/ada3
bsdlabel -wB /dev/ada3s1
newfs -O2 -U /dev/ada3s1a

This drive is now /dev/sdg on Ubuntu 14.04, which I've been unable to mount.

I've tried to mount it like so:

$ sudo mount -r -t ufs -o ro,ufstype=ufs2 /dev/sdg1 /mnt/tmp/
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sdg1,
       missing codepage or helper program, or other error
       In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try
       dmesg | tail  or so

Output from more relevant commands:

$ sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdg

Disk /dev/sdg: 1000.2 GB, 1000203804160 bytes
16 heads, 63 sectors/track, 1938018 cylinders, total 1953523055 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x90909090

   Device Boot      Start         End      Blocks   Id  System
/dev/sdg1   *          63  1953522143   976761040+  a5  FreeBSD

$ sudo hexdump /dev/sdg1 | grep -w '1954'
0000d00 3cf0 0000 543d 0119 7400 3d1f 0119 1954
...

As you can see, the UFS2 magic number 0x19540119 is present at offset 0xd0c. At what offset does the driver expect it?

dmesg shows:

[ 2499.499004] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdg] 1953523055 512-byte logical blocks: (1.00 TB/931 GiB)
[ 2499.500127] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdg] Write Protect is off
[ 2499.500133] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdg] Mode Sense: 00 38 00 00
[ 2499.500996] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdg] Asking for cache data failed
[ 2499.501306] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdg] Assuming drive cache: write through
[ 2499.528760]  sdg: sdg1
[ 2499.528760]  sdg1: <bsd: >
[ 2499.532364] sd 7:0:0:0: [sdg] Attached SCSI disk
[ 2511.225195] ufs: ufs_fill_super(): bad magic number

I have also tried without the ro option. I've tried ufstype=44bsd, offset=32256 and offset=32768

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!

Craig Younkins
  • 141
  • 1
  • 5
  • I wasn't able to find the answer to this, and I ended up booting FreeBSD to mount my new ZFS pool and the UFS2 partitions and copy the data. In hindsight, it would have been fine to use ZFS to copy the data, but I thought UFS2 would have had a better chance of being readable. – Craig Younkins Oct 21 '15 at 22:11

0 Answers0