[Bradford] New laptop, cannot mount partitions

[Steve Wilson]

What's the output of blkid show?

This should allow you to identify the actual file system used on the 
partition, it might be a case of making sure the filesystem tools/progs 
package is installed for the specific file system.

I've not tried arch so I don't the the OS specific details, maybe it's 
time I had a play with it.

Steve.

On 09/03/2019 23:06, Devo Too via Bradford wrote:
> 
> 
> On 09/03/2019 19:49, Darren Drapkin wrote:
>> On Saturday 09 Mar 2019 17:19:38 Devo Too via Bradford wrote:
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> Shiny new laptop received yesterday. Followed the Arch Wiki to set up
>>> from a .iso on a memory stick and all looked well until - immediately
>>> after partitioning the hard drive, trying the mount command.
>>>
>>> For both sda2 (root partition set as Linux root (x86-64), using mount
>>> /dev/sda2 /mnt) and sda3 (home partition set as Linux filesystem, using
>>> mount /dev/sda3 /mnt/home having set up /mnt/home directory).
>>>
>>> sda1 is an EFI System partition and mounted OK.
>>>
>>> At the mount command, both partitions, response is:
>>>
>>> /mnt: wrong fs type,
>> This suggests to me that you have to specify the type of filling system
>> explicitly, for some reason #mount /dev/sda2 /  is not enough. 
>> Possibly you
>> will need to make sure you are mounting the root partition on the 
>> right place
>> and you may need a# -t option
> 
> Done that - tried both as 'Linux filesystem', which all the tutorials 
> sanction, then root as 'Linux root (x86-64)' with the same response each 
> time.
>>
>>
>>> bad option,
>>> bad superblock on /dev/sda2, missing
>> Bad superblock suggests that you may have that rare thing on a modern 
>> hard
>> drive, an actual defective sector. You may need to run fsck on it.
> 
> As it occurs on two partitions, each occupying separate sets of sectors, 
> it would surely indicate at least two bad sectors? But thanks, I'll try 
> fsck too.
>>
>>> codepage or helper program, or other error
>>>
>>> Google searches haven't thrown any light on the topic so far although it
>>> is a commonly reported problem.
> 
> One of several more G searches suggests the possibility of a corrupted 
> kernel in the download. That .iso has been in the Arch Downloads since 
> 1st March and I used the Bytemark repository, which I'd trust more than 
> most, as source. It's none too convincing. Besides, most of the searches 
> have thrown up reports from over a year ago and there probably was a 
> kernel corruption in the December 2017 release most mention.
>>>
>>> Do any of you have ideas?
>>>
>>> Could it be a hard drive problem? I've tried unsuccessfully to use both
>>> parted and fsdisk to do the partitioning. It's a 960GB hdd so I suspect
>>> it should have 4KB sectors rather than 512 bytes, although the system
>>> reports otherwise.
>>>
>>> All pointers welcome.
>>>
>>> TIA.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>