I am working on a project for set top boxes and I need to mount a HDD partition formatted with xtvfs filesystem.
I have only received the following information regarding xtvfs:
The partition formatted with xtvfs is basically a type 1 (FAT12) to be used with xtvfs
I searched the internet and found a program called Copy+ that can be used to copy xtvfs images form one HDD to another.
The set top I am working on uses linux and so I need to mount and read the partition on it.
I have the following question:
I did not find any xtvfs named filesystem supported in the kernel. Can I be able to mount it using vfat?
If not, then how do I get to work such a filesystem in Linux.
Information on XTVFS is hard to find and support is not widespread - http://wiki.ph-mb.com/wiki/XTVFS is probably the best page I found. I could not find a linux driver for it. XTVFS is based on FAT32 and mounting that on Linux will get you part of the way - basically for everything but the video files. The video files have a separate Video FAT and video data section. I wrote some code to read files from an XTVFS image and will share it once it is tidied.
Related
I am looking for a program that would allow me to mirror one partition to another disk (something like RAID1) for Linux. It doesn't have to be a windowed application, it can be a console application, I just want what is in one place to be mirrored to another.
It would be nice if it were possible to mirror a specific folder that I would care for instead of copying everything from the given partition.
I was looking on the internet, but it's hard to find something that would give such opportunities, hence the idea to ask such a question.
I do not want to make fake RAID on Linux or hardware RAID because I read that if the motherboard fails then it is best to have the same second one to recover data.
I will be grateful for every suggestion :)
You can check my script "CopyDirFile" written in bash, which is located on github.
You can perform a replication (mirroring) task of any source folder to another destination folder (deleting a file in the source folder means deleting it in the destination folder).
The script also allows you to create copy tasks (deleted files in the source folder will not be deleted in the target folder).
The tasks are executed in background at a specified time, not all the time, frequency is set by the user when creating the task.
You can also set the task to start automatically when the user logs on.
All the necessary information can be found in the README file in repository.
If I understood you correctly, I think it meets your requirements.
Linux has standard support for software RAID: mdraid.
It allows you to bundle two disk devices into a RAID 1 device (among other things); you then create a filesystem on top of that device.
LVM offers another way to do software RAID; it doesn't seem to be very popular, but it's certainly supported.
(If your system supports hardware RAID, on the motherboard or with a separate RAID controller, Linux can use that, too, but that doesn't seem to be what you're asking here.)
Today I just realized in my Ubuntu Linux, I can mount and store files on my newly purchased hard drive as a raw device without a file system. (as long as I partitioned the disk correctly)
So, I am not sure if my below statement is correct, looking for expert to answer:
Looks like it's not required to create a file system on a disk in order to use it in Linux? Is it correct?
I have some very basic understanding of how a file system works. In Linux, is the concept of "inode" a file system feature or a Linux feature?
I understand that the "inode" file system works unlike NTFS or FAT32 that it tries to spread out the data across the disk so that Linux/Unix doesn't need as Windows like "defgramentation" program to keep data in consecutive chunks. My question is, if I am storing my data on a raw device without a file system, and if "inode" is a file system feature not a Linux feature, what will the actual data layout look like on the raw device then?
Thanks in advance
After running BitBake on several different recipe files, BitBake generates a file of type '.hddimg'. I haven't been able to find a clear explanation on what this file is used for, the closest that I have found is some speculation on the mailing list here. The author Paul states that:
the image isn't an image of a regular bootable system drive, but is a "live
image" of a smaller system that can either boot the real system from a
virtualized file system in RAM whose image is read from a single file in the
first level, or it can install the real system to a different drive.
The 'bootimg.bbclass' is what generates the .hddimg, and in the opening comments it is written that:
A .hddimg file [is] an msdos filesystem containing syslinux, a kernel, an initrd and a rootfs image. These can be written to harddisks directly and also booted on USB flash disks (write them there with dd).
Which appears to corroborate with what Paul wrote, but still leaves a lot of ambiguity on how to go about booting from this file (at least to a greenhorn like me).
Well, the doc says "write them there with dd". So:
dd if=/path/to/your/hddimg of=/path/to/raw/usb/device
so, if you have the file as my.hddimg and the usb flash disk appears as /dev/sdg
dd if=/home/karobar/my.hddimg of=/dev/sdg
As it's name implies, it's an image, so needs to be written as such. The actual file system is inside of the rootfs file, which is similarly an image!
Once you have that on the usb stick, the usb stick itself should be bootable. Depending on what you're trying to do this may not be the easiest kind of output from bitbake to work with.
I have a requirement. I have two virtual image files running light weight linux distribution (eg : slitaz),whose disk sizes are different. I want to check the integrity of the kernel running of these image files at a given point in time at block/sector level.
I have already accomplished the integrity check at file system level,by mounting the image to loop device and then accessing the required kernel files (vmlinuz and initrd) and hashing them and then comparing that hash with the genuine hash for these files.
Now I want to perform case to check integrity at block level,Here is what I did :
But is there a way to check the integrity in this case?
As we know that the contents at the block/sector level match for the part which belongs to the kernel in the two image files since they are running same linux distro.
I am unable to get block level information of the kernel resides to check for its integrity.Assuming my kernel files reside more than one block,how do i get info?
Any tool or any guidance in this is greatly appreciated.
If I understand correctly, does your question not simply become:
I need to know on which disk blocks exactly (within these file systems) the kernel files are located.
If that is the case (depending on the file system involved) you could probably use debugfs like described in this post.
I have a linux busybox based system on a chip. I want to provide an update to users in the field and this requires updating some files in /lib /usr/bin and /etc. I don't think that it's safe to simple untar the files directly. Is there a safe way to do this including /lib files that may be in use?
Some things I strongly prefer in embedded systems:
a) Have the root file system be a ramdisk uncompressed from an image in flash. This is great because you can experimentally monkey around with it to your heart's content and if you mess up, all you need is a reboot to get back to the flashed configuration. When you have tested a set of change you like, you generate a new compressed root filesystem image and flash that.
b) Use a bootloader such as u-boot to do your updates - flashing a new complete image - rather than trying to change the linux system while it is running. Though since the flashed copy isn't live, you can actually flash it while running. If you flash a bad version, u-boot is still there to flash a good one.
c) Processors which have mask-rom UART (or even USB) bootloaders, making the system un-brickable - nothing more than a laptop and a serial cable or usb/serial converter is ever needed to do maintenance (ie, get a working u-boot image on the flash, which you then use to get a working linux kernel+compressed root fs image on it)
Ideally your flash device is big enough to partition into two complete filesystems and each update updates the other side (plus copying over config files if necessary) and updates the boot configuration to boot from the updated side.
Less ideal is to update in-place but have some means of detecting boot failure (watchdog that's not touched until after boot, for example) and have a smaller, fallback partition which is capable of accepting another update and fixing the primary partition.
As far as the in-place update of a live filesystem, just use a real installer (which will move the target files out of the way before replacing them to avoid the problem you describe).
You received two excellent answers above and I Strongly encourage you to do what you were advised to.
There is, however, a more simple way. In a matter of fact you can just untar your libraries, provided that the process that does this is statically linked.