"[danny]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It sounds as you actually want fsck to check journalled drives,
yes, i do want checking journalized fses by default if the user does not choose anything. > while, in my experience, the journal update at mount is much safer > than fsck in my experience, not checking journalized fses can results in slowly accumulating small corruption in metadata until the day you got real problems because of this. journalised fses provides quite more stable fs regarding metadata lost and big corruptions but that does not means they protect you against all fs corruptions. i often see small mismatch in free/used iodes/blocks after journal replaying. these small glitches can cause bigger damage later if not fixed. > (which doesn't use the journal to restore, but just fixes incorrect > stuff, which usually means: deletes incorrect stuff). current fsck for ext3 does replay journal *before* checking & fixing it. i cannot speak for other journalised fses though. i've only heavily test ext3 but neither jfs nor xfs nor reiserfs.
