Noob help pls

[ebod]

Hi all,

Please be gentle with me and don't through too many jargon terms at me

I have an old Athlon 2.66 PC with 1gig ram that I've stripped down to bare bones ( no gfx/sound etc ). Its got two old IDE drives, a 250GB & 120GB which I can see via the bios. I wanted to experiment with a household nas box to have one shared source for media via various windows / android / xbox / ipad devices in my house.

I've downloaded and installed Freenas8 32bit disk with no extras/plugins and done a successfull install, i.e. I can access via 192.168.0.20.

My 250GB drive is visible, but my 120GB is not. Why could this be?

Also,, fom my total noob poor understanding of networking,,, how do I map to "/mnt/SHAREONE" from windows and other devices ( android / xbox etc ). Sorry this mught be elementary to most....but for me this is groundbreaking stuff

Thx

 

[ben]

Did you install FreeNAS on the 120GB disk by any chance? FreeNAS will ignore its entire install disk except what it needs to boot. If that's what you did, get a 4GB USB flash drive and install to that instead.

 

[ebod]

yup I simply downloaded the iso file and burned it. Its a ~98MB iso file.

Not sure an old athlon unit could boot from a usb drive? Are you saying I'd need a permenant 4gb usb drive plugged in to act as space for the operating system, then the two IDE drives will pop up as available.?

Why can't it run off a mini partition?

 

[ben]

FreeNAS is designed to isolate storage from the OS, thus preventing any risk to files through OS upgrades. FreeNAS installs with direct bit for bit copy to the target drive and will always use exactly what it needs on that drive and no more. The vast majority of FreeNAS users use a USB drive as recommended. Don't worry about wear on the drive - the root slice is loaded into RAM anyway and barely ever touches the physical device. You just need it plugged in.

FYI, you're running on the barest minimum hardware - far below the recommended minimum of 4GB RAM. It will probably still work, but may be a bit unstable. I suggest making each disk a separate UFS volume with a separate SMB/CIFS (Windows) share, that should let you do more or less what you want with the resources you have.