When I was your age I worked for slightly above minimum wage at a job I didn't like, so I decided to go back to school for Computer Science. I was able to move in to QA shortly after, and found a job as a software engineer before I graduated.
I've written a few articles and have a ton of notes for more. They're more focused on specific problems we run into in class at my university. I haven't published any yet, but I have a domain name and plan on publishing some soon.
When I ask myself why I want to do this, the main reason is that...
Stroustrup's The C++ Programming Language would be the equivalent. It's extremely well written. Like K&R, it's probably not best for the absolute beginner. It's quite a bit thicker than K&R, though.
Yes, but my first post shows sdc1 as being 10.9T. Am I misinterpreting the output?
hmmm...I used parted. Maybe I didn't change a default somewhere. Let me go back and check...
I just tried the steps in atanere's article and that did it! I don't know why this works from within parted...
That's interesting. lsblk shows size as 10.9T (above), while lsblk -f shows FSAVAIL and FSUSE as if it were only the 2T. There is a 1.9T backup file on the drive now.
$ lsblk -f
NAME FSTYPE FSVER LABEL UUID FSAVAIL FSUSE% MOUNTPOINTS
sdc...
My 12 TB drive is only showing up as 2 TB in df -h. lsblk is showing correctly (irrelevant drive info removed):
$ lsblk
NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINTS
sdc 8:32 0 10.9T 0 disk
└─sdc1 8:33 0 10.9T 0 part /mnt/backup
$ df -h
Filesystem Size Used...
Oh, another thing I thought was odd. When I get mdadm --build /dev/md127 to work by using sdb1 alone, I get the following output from lsblk. md126 comes up below md127. I don't know why or where md126 came from.
sdb 8:16 0 1.8T 0 disk
└─sdb1 8:17 0 1.8T 0 part...
I'm hoping some of the experts can help me out with this. There's a lot going on here.
I have a dual boot system running Arch and Gentoo. I had a 2TB raid1 drive (2 mirrored 2TB drives), and recently (about a month ago) installed a 12TB standalone drive. I'm also using reFind if that matters...