---------- Initial Header ----------- >From : "Dave Kleikamp" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc : "JFS Discussion" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date : Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:29:55 -0500 Subject : Re: [Jfs-discussion] fsck.jfs CATASTROPHIC ERROR 24: i'm desparate :(
> On Fri, 2003-09-12 at 04:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi! > > i cannot any more mount a 7GB jfs filesystem. when i try to fsck.jfs it, fsck > > stops complining about -11024 internal error... my fsck version is 1.1.1. Seems > > that the file that fires the error (fsckmeta.c) didn't change very much in > > 1.1.3 (i think it only changed the way it outputs error messages) but anyway the > > error could not be local to that file. where can i find a statically linked > > 1.1.3 fsck.jfs? is that worth to try with that? > > I can't recall seeing this error before. I don't expect the 1.1.3 > fsck.jfs to help, but you never know. Why statically linked? Is this > your root filesystem? in fact it doesn't help. yes... it is (was?) my root filesystem... and i'm starting from a live cd. anyway i compiled it statically linked on a old slackware... mounting read only works... but when i dig into the mount point... it is empty. dd if=/dev/hda of=/mnt/something/my_fs stops after the 2GB limit... then i'm trying: strings /dev/hda | gzip -9 > /mnt/something/my_strings.gz but then how will i decompress my_strings.gz, since linux has a 2GB file size limit??? > > please is there a way to recover as much data as i can? any trick/hack? i annot > > ever dd from that device to a file in an other filesystem because that device is > > bigger than 2GB :( > > Are you able to mount the file system read-only? You may be able to > recover most of the data this way. > > Did fsck print any error messages prior to the -11024 internal error? > I'm trying to determine what would cause this error. no error before, unless called with the -vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv option... anyway error (-11024.0.0.0) happened in phase 3. if only i managed to dump /dev/hda2 in binary form to a backup file i could try to skip phase 3 by inserting a wonderful return FSCK_OK... what do you think about it? > > Thanks, > Shaggy > -- > David Kleikamp > IBM Linux Technology Center > thank you... i'm desperate :( Alessandro Salvatori _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
