On Sunday 14 April 2002 11:35 pm, Rich Puhek wrote: > ben wrote: > > so that e2fsck on an unmounted partition is okay? but to check a mounted > > partition it should be efsck? or what? > > > > sorry, i haven't been following the thread. i'm not sure if it matters > > but since using the 2.4.17 kernel on my machine , crashes nessecitating > > the check haven't happened, at all. > > Umm no... > > First off, "fsck" just calls the appropriate filesystem-specific > program, which happens to be "e2fsck" for most of us. I've never heard > of efsck... possible typo? > > Second, You always want to fsck unmounted partitions only. If nothing > else, trying to fsck a mounted partition produces the following message: > > "WARNING!!! Running e2fsck on a mounted filesystem may cause > SEVERE filesystem damage." > > Mr. Ts'o (the guy who wrote a large portion of the ext2 stuff in Linux) > knows much more about filesystems in general, and ext2 in particular, > than I do, so I listen to that error message. > > Finally, It's not just crashes that will cause the system to run an fsck > at boot time. There's a mount counter that will automatically fsck after > so many reboots (or was it mounts?). I recall the number being set to > 20. You can also force checking upon reboot by supplying the "-F" option > to the shutdown command. > no probs. that's exactly my understanding of the situation; although pre-2.4.17 kernels crashed so often, i really thought my disk was fscked. since then, it's all been good--so much so that i've been reticent about moving up from there.
thanks for the response. ben -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]