I think this is an ext3 probleme ... I don't understand why diskdrake default fs type is not xfs.
Le mer 17/09/2003 à 13:49, Thierry Vignaud a écrit : > "[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. -- ## Bellegarde Cédric
