Mounting a new hard drive (sda1) to my existing filesystemWhy when I retrieve the list of partitions it only gives me one result?File system is not clean (The partition is misaligned by 1024 bytes)Unable to mount an LVM Hard-drive after upgradeDeleted Windows Partitions on drive now what do I do?Raid Issues Cannot Boot and Getting Superblock ErrorsCan't remove GPT table from hard driveDrive failure in Raid1. Can't replaceBoot linux on external hard disk - Send Grub RescueHow to configure existing raid after upgrading to 14.04 from 11Intel RAID5 array Shows < 50% space

Unbreakable Formation vs. Cry of the Carnarium

If a centaur druid Wild Shapes into a Giant Elk, do their Charge features stack?

Short story: alien planet where slow students are executed

Landing in very high winds

COUNT(*) or MAX(id) - which is faster?

Doomsday-clock for my fantasy planet

Are white and non-white police officers equally likely to kill black suspects?

What is it called when one voice type sings a 'solo'?

Extreme, but not acceptable situation and I can't start the work tomorrow morning

What to wear for invited talk in Canada

Can I legally use front facing blue light in the UK?

How to move the player while also allowing forces to affect it

When blogging recipes, how can I support both readers who want the narrative/journey and ones who want the printer-friendly recipe?

Re-submission of rejected manuscript without informing co-authors

Finding files for which a command fails

Is domain driven design an anti-SQL pattern?

Where else does the Shulchan Aruch quote an authority by name?

Domain expired, GoDaddy holds it and is asking more money

Does it makes sense to buy a new cycle to learn riding?

What happens when a metallic dragon and a chromatic dragon mate?

What is GPS' 19 year rollover and does it present a cybersecurity issue?

Denied boarding due to overcrowding, Sparpreis ticket. What are my rights?

How to manage monthly salary

LWC and complex parameters



Mounting a new hard drive (sda1) to my existing filesystem


Why when I retrieve the list of partitions it only gives me one result?File system is not clean (The partition is misaligned by 1024 bytes)Unable to mount an LVM Hard-drive after upgradeDeleted Windows Partitions on drive now what do I do?Raid Issues Cannot Boot and Getting Superblock ErrorsCan't remove GPT table from hard driveDrive failure in Raid1. Can't replaceBoot linux on external hard disk - Send Grub RescueHow to configure existing raid after upgrading to 14.04 from 11Intel RAID5 array Shows < 50% space






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








0















I tried to read some posts regarding mounting a new hard drive, but I am facing some problem. My new hard drive is sda1. The output of sudo fdisk -l is:



sudo fdisk -l

Disk /dev/sdb: 999.7 GB, 999653638144 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121534 cylinders, total 1952448512 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: 0x00016485

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 * 2048 1935822847 967910400 83 Linux
/dev/sdb2 1935824894 1952446463 8310785 5 Extended
/dev/sdb5 1935824896 1952446463 8310784 82 Linux swap / Solaris

Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x78dbcdc1

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 2048 1953521663 976759808 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT


What should be done to add this new sda1 hard drive on booting up? What should be added in the /etc/fstab file? I have not performed any partition on the new sda1 drive. I need help on how to proceed from scratch and can't afford to take any risk.
Please help!










share|improve this question
















bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.















  • Do you have a GUI?

    – Dan
    Jun 4 '14 at 20:27







  • 1





    What type will it be? ext4? ntfs?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 4 '14 at 21:04











  • Yes I do have a gui! I don't know if it should be ext4 or ntfs as well.

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 16:54











  • Don't forget to ping in a comment (@someone) ext4 is linux, ntfs is used by windows. should windows be able to read the disk?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:09












  • @Jacob: No, I have not dual booted the machine, so only have Ubuntu running on my box.

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:57

















0















I tried to read some posts regarding mounting a new hard drive, but I am facing some problem. My new hard drive is sda1. The output of sudo fdisk -l is:



sudo fdisk -l

Disk /dev/sdb: 999.7 GB, 999653638144 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121534 cylinders, total 1952448512 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: 0x00016485

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 * 2048 1935822847 967910400 83 Linux
/dev/sdb2 1935824894 1952446463 8310785 5 Extended
/dev/sdb5 1935824896 1952446463 8310784 82 Linux swap / Solaris

Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x78dbcdc1

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 2048 1953521663 976759808 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT


What should be done to add this new sda1 hard drive on booting up? What should be added in the /etc/fstab file? I have not performed any partition on the new sda1 drive. I need help on how to proceed from scratch and can't afford to take any risk.
Please help!










share|improve this question
















bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.















  • Do you have a GUI?

    – Dan
    Jun 4 '14 at 20:27







  • 1





    What type will it be? ext4? ntfs?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 4 '14 at 21:04











  • Yes I do have a gui! I don't know if it should be ext4 or ntfs as well.

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 16:54











  • Don't forget to ping in a comment (@someone) ext4 is linux, ntfs is used by windows. should windows be able to read the disk?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:09












  • @Jacob: No, I have not dual booted the machine, so only have Ubuntu running on my box.

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:57













0












0








0








I tried to read some posts regarding mounting a new hard drive, but I am facing some problem. My new hard drive is sda1. The output of sudo fdisk -l is:



sudo fdisk -l

Disk /dev/sdb: 999.7 GB, 999653638144 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121534 cylinders, total 1952448512 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: 0x00016485

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 * 2048 1935822847 967910400 83 Linux
/dev/sdb2 1935824894 1952446463 8310785 5 Extended
/dev/sdb5 1935824896 1952446463 8310784 82 Linux swap / Solaris

Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x78dbcdc1

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 2048 1953521663 976759808 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT


What should be done to add this new sda1 hard drive on booting up? What should be added in the /etc/fstab file? I have not performed any partition on the new sda1 drive. I need help on how to proceed from scratch and can't afford to take any risk.
Please help!










share|improve this question
















I tried to read some posts regarding mounting a new hard drive, but I am facing some problem. My new hard drive is sda1. The output of sudo fdisk -l is:



sudo fdisk -l

Disk /dev/sdb: 999.7 GB, 999653638144 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121534 cylinders, total 1952448512 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: 0x00016485

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 * 2048 1935822847 967910400 83 Linux
/dev/sdb2 1935824894 1952446463 8310785 5 Extended
/dev/sdb5 1935824896 1952446463 8310784 82 Linux swap / Solaris

Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x78dbcdc1

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 2048 1953521663 976759808 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT


What should be done to add this new sda1 hard drive on booting up? What should be added in the /etc/fstab file? I have not performed any partition on the new sda1 drive. I need help on how to proceed from scratch and can't afford to take any risk.
Please help!







partitioning mount






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jun 4 '14 at 20:23









Jacob Vlijm

66.3k9134231




66.3k9134231










asked Jun 4 '14 at 20:19









shank22shank22

1112




1112





bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.







bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.














  • Do you have a GUI?

    – Dan
    Jun 4 '14 at 20:27







  • 1





    What type will it be? ext4? ntfs?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 4 '14 at 21:04











  • Yes I do have a gui! I don't know if it should be ext4 or ntfs as well.

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 16:54











  • Don't forget to ping in a comment (@someone) ext4 is linux, ntfs is used by windows. should windows be able to read the disk?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:09












  • @Jacob: No, I have not dual booted the machine, so only have Ubuntu running on my box.

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:57

















  • Do you have a GUI?

    – Dan
    Jun 4 '14 at 20:27







  • 1





    What type will it be? ext4? ntfs?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 4 '14 at 21:04











  • Yes I do have a gui! I don't know if it should be ext4 or ntfs as well.

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 16:54











  • Don't forget to ping in a comment (@someone) ext4 is linux, ntfs is used by windows. should windows be able to read the disk?

    – Jacob Vlijm
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:09












  • @Jacob: No, I have not dual booted the machine, so only have Ubuntu running on my box.

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:57
















Do you have a GUI?

– Dan
Jun 4 '14 at 20:27






Do you have a GUI?

– Dan
Jun 4 '14 at 20:27





1




1





What type will it be? ext4? ntfs?

– Jacob Vlijm
Jun 4 '14 at 21:04





What type will it be? ext4? ntfs?

– Jacob Vlijm
Jun 4 '14 at 21:04













Yes I do have a gui! I don't know if it should be ext4 or ntfs as well.

– shank22
Jun 5 '14 at 16:54





Yes I do have a gui! I don't know if it should be ext4 or ntfs as well.

– shank22
Jun 5 '14 at 16:54













Don't forget to ping in a comment (@someone) ext4 is linux, ntfs is used by windows. should windows be able to read the disk?

– Jacob Vlijm
Jun 5 '14 at 18:09






Don't forget to ping in a comment (@someone) ext4 is linux, ntfs is used by windows. should windows be able to read the disk?

– Jacob Vlijm
Jun 5 '14 at 18:09














@Jacob: No, I have not dual booted the machine, so only have Ubuntu running on my box.

– shank22
Jun 6 '14 at 23:57





@Jacob: No, I have not dual booted the machine, so only have Ubuntu running on my box.

– shank22
Jun 6 '14 at 23:57










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0














A possible recommendation, which will mount sda1 at system startup with read-write permissions for you and your group, and read-only permissions for others, might be adding this line to /etc/fstab:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ntfs defaults,auto,nls=utf8,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmask=002,fmask=113 0 0


And if you don't have any plans for a shared use of this drive with Windows, you can prefer using EXT4 format and then add this line instead:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ext4 nodev,nosuid 0 2


Note: You can get the UUID and Label of SDA1 using GParted.






share|improve this answer

























  • No need to enter any command to mount?

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:01











  • I have important data that I would not like to lose, also I have an existing NFS mount, which got unmounted the last time I tried something like this!

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:07











  • The command mount is entered in Terminal, fstab entries like this is another way achieving the same result. AFAIK mounting partitions in this way, i.e. via fstab entries (especially using UUIDs instead of Labels) should not normally interfere with each other, and should not cause any data loss other than gaining full or restricted or no access to this or that device. In any case you might also use Clonezilla to backup a partition in a matter of minutes before trying.

    – Sadi
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:52











  • Why ntfs? Like Jacob suggested above, should it be ext4?

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:56











  • @shank22 : 1) I assumed that you're happy with the existing format of sda1 and would not want to re-format it unless you have a good reason to do so, in which case you should of course use other options for fstab, 2) the existing NTFS format of your sda1 might be more convenient if you intend to use this disk drive from a non-Linux operating system like Windows now or in the future. Otherwise you can of course prefer EXT4 format and perhaps just stick with the defaults in the fstab options.

    – Sadi
    Jun 7 '14 at 10:13












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f476924%2fmounting-a-new-hard-drive-sda1-to-my-existing-filesystem%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0














A possible recommendation, which will mount sda1 at system startup with read-write permissions for you and your group, and read-only permissions for others, might be adding this line to /etc/fstab:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ntfs defaults,auto,nls=utf8,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmask=002,fmask=113 0 0


And if you don't have any plans for a shared use of this drive with Windows, you can prefer using EXT4 format and then add this line instead:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ext4 nodev,nosuid 0 2


Note: You can get the UUID and Label of SDA1 using GParted.






share|improve this answer

























  • No need to enter any command to mount?

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:01











  • I have important data that I would not like to lose, also I have an existing NFS mount, which got unmounted the last time I tried something like this!

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:07











  • The command mount is entered in Terminal, fstab entries like this is another way achieving the same result. AFAIK mounting partitions in this way, i.e. via fstab entries (especially using UUIDs instead of Labels) should not normally interfere with each other, and should not cause any data loss other than gaining full or restricted or no access to this or that device. In any case you might also use Clonezilla to backup a partition in a matter of minutes before trying.

    – Sadi
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:52











  • Why ntfs? Like Jacob suggested above, should it be ext4?

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:56











  • @shank22 : 1) I assumed that you're happy with the existing format of sda1 and would not want to re-format it unless you have a good reason to do so, in which case you should of course use other options for fstab, 2) the existing NTFS format of your sda1 might be more convenient if you intend to use this disk drive from a non-Linux operating system like Windows now or in the future. Otherwise you can of course prefer EXT4 format and perhaps just stick with the defaults in the fstab options.

    – Sadi
    Jun 7 '14 at 10:13
















0














A possible recommendation, which will mount sda1 at system startup with read-write permissions for you and your group, and read-only permissions for others, might be adding this line to /etc/fstab:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ntfs defaults,auto,nls=utf8,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmask=002,fmask=113 0 0


And if you don't have any plans for a shared use of this drive with Windows, you can prefer using EXT4 format and then add this line instead:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ext4 nodev,nosuid 0 2


Note: You can get the UUID and Label of SDA1 using GParted.






share|improve this answer

























  • No need to enter any command to mount?

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:01











  • I have important data that I would not like to lose, also I have an existing NFS mount, which got unmounted the last time I tried something like this!

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:07











  • The command mount is entered in Terminal, fstab entries like this is another way achieving the same result. AFAIK mounting partitions in this way, i.e. via fstab entries (especially using UUIDs instead of Labels) should not normally interfere with each other, and should not cause any data loss other than gaining full or restricted or no access to this or that device. In any case you might also use Clonezilla to backup a partition in a matter of minutes before trying.

    – Sadi
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:52











  • Why ntfs? Like Jacob suggested above, should it be ext4?

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:56











  • @shank22 : 1) I assumed that you're happy with the existing format of sda1 and would not want to re-format it unless you have a good reason to do so, in which case you should of course use other options for fstab, 2) the existing NTFS format of your sda1 might be more convenient if you intend to use this disk drive from a non-Linux operating system like Windows now or in the future. Otherwise you can of course prefer EXT4 format and perhaps just stick with the defaults in the fstab options.

    – Sadi
    Jun 7 '14 at 10:13














0












0








0







A possible recommendation, which will mount sda1 at system startup with read-write permissions for you and your group, and read-only permissions for others, might be adding this line to /etc/fstab:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ntfs defaults,auto,nls=utf8,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmask=002,fmask=113 0 0


And if you don't have any plans for a shared use of this drive with Windows, you can prefer using EXT4 format and then add this line instead:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ext4 nodev,nosuid 0 2


Note: You can get the UUID and Label of SDA1 using GParted.






share|improve this answer















A possible recommendation, which will mount sda1 at system startup with read-write permissions for you and your group, and read-only permissions for others, might be adding this line to /etc/fstab:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ntfs defaults,auto,nls=utf8,uid=1000,gid=1000,dmask=002,fmask=113 0 0


And if you don't have any plans for a shared use of this drive with Windows, you can prefer using EXT4 format and then add this line instead:



UUID=<ID-NO-OF-SDA1> /media/<Your-User-Name>/<Label-Of-SDA1> ext4 nodev,nosuid 0 2


Note: You can get the UUID and Label of SDA1 using GParted.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Jun 7 '14 at 10:23

























answered Jun 5 '14 at 15:30









SadiSadi

8,94544048




8,94544048












  • No need to enter any command to mount?

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:01











  • I have important data that I would not like to lose, also I have an existing NFS mount, which got unmounted the last time I tried something like this!

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:07











  • The command mount is entered in Terminal, fstab entries like this is another way achieving the same result. AFAIK mounting partitions in this way, i.e. via fstab entries (especially using UUIDs instead of Labels) should not normally interfere with each other, and should not cause any data loss other than gaining full or restricted or no access to this or that device. In any case you might also use Clonezilla to backup a partition in a matter of minutes before trying.

    – Sadi
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:52











  • Why ntfs? Like Jacob suggested above, should it be ext4?

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:56











  • @shank22 : 1) I assumed that you're happy with the existing format of sda1 and would not want to re-format it unless you have a good reason to do so, in which case you should of course use other options for fstab, 2) the existing NTFS format of your sda1 might be more convenient if you intend to use this disk drive from a non-Linux operating system like Windows now or in the future. Otherwise you can of course prefer EXT4 format and perhaps just stick with the defaults in the fstab options.

    – Sadi
    Jun 7 '14 at 10:13


















  • No need to enter any command to mount?

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:01











  • I have important data that I would not like to lose, also I have an existing NFS mount, which got unmounted the last time I tried something like this!

    – shank22
    Jun 5 '14 at 17:07











  • The command mount is entered in Terminal, fstab entries like this is another way achieving the same result. AFAIK mounting partitions in this way, i.e. via fstab entries (especially using UUIDs instead of Labels) should not normally interfere with each other, and should not cause any data loss other than gaining full or restricted or no access to this or that device. In any case you might also use Clonezilla to backup a partition in a matter of minutes before trying.

    – Sadi
    Jun 5 '14 at 18:52











  • Why ntfs? Like Jacob suggested above, should it be ext4?

    – shank22
    Jun 6 '14 at 23:56











  • @shank22 : 1) I assumed that you're happy with the existing format of sda1 and would not want to re-format it unless you have a good reason to do so, in which case you should of course use other options for fstab, 2) the existing NTFS format of your sda1 might be more convenient if you intend to use this disk drive from a non-Linux operating system like Windows now or in the future. Otherwise you can of course prefer EXT4 format and perhaps just stick with the defaults in the fstab options.

    – Sadi
    Jun 7 '14 at 10:13

















No need to enter any command to mount?

– shank22
Jun 5 '14 at 17:01





No need to enter any command to mount?

– shank22
Jun 5 '14 at 17:01













I have important data that I would not like to lose, also I have an existing NFS mount, which got unmounted the last time I tried something like this!

– shank22
Jun 5 '14 at 17:07





I have important data that I would not like to lose, also I have an existing NFS mount, which got unmounted the last time I tried something like this!

– shank22
Jun 5 '14 at 17:07













The command mount is entered in Terminal, fstab entries like this is another way achieving the same result. AFAIK mounting partitions in this way, i.e. via fstab entries (especially using UUIDs instead of Labels) should not normally interfere with each other, and should not cause any data loss other than gaining full or restricted or no access to this or that device. In any case you might also use Clonezilla to backup a partition in a matter of minutes before trying.

– Sadi
Jun 5 '14 at 18:52





The command mount is entered in Terminal, fstab entries like this is another way achieving the same result. AFAIK mounting partitions in this way, i.e. via fstab entries (especially using UUIDs instead of Labels) should not normally interfere with each other, and should not cause any data loss other than gaining full or restricted or no access to this or that device. In any case you might also use Clonezilla to backup a partition in a matter of minutes before trying.

– Sadi
Jun 5 '14 at 18:52













Why ntfs? Like Jacob suggested above, should it be ext4?

– shank22
Jun 6 '14 at 23:56





Why ntfs? Like Jacob suggested above, should it be ext4?

– shank22
Jun 6 '14 at 23:56













@shank22 : 1) I assumed that you're happy with the existing format of sda1 and would not want to re-format it unless you have a good reason to do so, in which case you should of course use other options for fstab, 2) the existing NTFS format of your sda1 might be more convenient if you intend to use this disk drive from a non-Linux operating system like Windows now or in the future. Otherwise you can of course prefer EXT4 format and perhaps just stick with the defaults in the fstab options.

– Sadi
Jun 7 '14 at 10:13






@shank22 : 1) I assumed that you're happy with the existing format of sda1 and would not want to re-format it unless you have a good reason to do so, in which case you should of course use other options for fstab, 2) the existing NTFS format of your sda1 might be more convenient if you intend to use this disk drive from a non-Linux operating system like Windows now or in the future. Otherwise you can of course prefer EXT4 format and perhaps just stick with the defaults in the fstab options.

– Sadi
Jun 7 '14 at 10:13


















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f476924%2fmounting-a-new-hard-drive-sda1-to-my-existing-filesystem%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Möglingen Índice Localización Historia Demografía Referencias Enlaces externos Menú de navegación48°53′18″N 9°07′45″E / 48.888333333333, 9.129166666666748°53′18″N 9°07′45″E / 48.888333333333, 9.1291666666667Sitio web oficial Mapa de Möglingen«Gemeinden in Deutschland nach Fläche, Bevölkerung und Postleitzahl am 30.09.2016»Möglingen

Virtualbox - Configuration error: Querying “UUID” failed (VERR_CFGM_VALUE_NOT_FOUND)“VERR_SUPLIB_WORLD_WRITABLE” error when trying to installing OS in virtualboxVirtual Box Kernel errorFailed to open a seesion for the virtual machineFailed to open a session for the virtual machineUbuntu 14.04 LTS Virtualbox errorcan't use VM VirtualBoxusing virtualboxI can't run Linux-64 Bit on VirtualBoxUnable to insert the virtual optical disk (VBoxguestaddition) in virtual machine for ubuntu server in win 10VirtuaBox in Ubuntu 18.04 Issues with Win10.ISO Installation

Torre de la Isleta Índice Véase también Referencias Bibliografía Enlaces externos Menú de navegación38°25′58″N 0°23′02″O / 38.43277778, -0.3838888938°25′58″N 0°23′02″O / 38.43277778, -0.38388889Torre de la Illeta de l’Horta o Torre Saleta. Base de datos de bienes inmuebles. Patrimonio Cultural. Secretaría de Estado de CulturaFicha BIC Torre de la Illeta de l’Horta. Dirección General de Patrimonio Cultural. Generalitat ValencianaLugares de interés. Ayuntamiento del CampelloTorre de la Isleta en CastillosNet.org