Only time I've ever used dumpe2fs is in forensics. Never in general sysadmin. I agreee with removal.
Justin On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 18:00 Alan McKinnon <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18/10/2017 17:14, Mark Clarke wrote: > > Given the slow death of the ext file system it would be appropriate to > > remove debugfs and dumpe2fs and with the growth in xfs I think it would > > be more appropriate to give xfs greater attention. I have never used > > debugfs nor dumep2fs for anything useful. Tune2fs used to be useful and > > still is occasionally. > > > > Could someone let me know how to use debugfs and dume2fs in any useful > > way? I really want to know as a non file system developer. I have > > exhausted my google foo and the only example one ever sees about debugfs > > is undeletling a file and this stopped working long ago as far as I > > understand it. > > > I would agree with both of you. In 15+ years I have never used debugfs > or dumpe2fs at all for any purpose. I would argue that that are barely > even suitable at LPIC-2 level, never mind LPIC-1. > > tunefs still has reasonably frequent use. I use it a lot for fs label (I > like to mount by LABEL=<thing> as opposed to by UUID) and for cranking > that 5% reserved space way down as low as I can get it. > > On that topic, why are we still talking about 5% reserved for root in > 2017? IIRC that comes from the mid-90s when 5% was a small number of > inodes. Nowadays a 16TB fs is not uncommon, that 5% is 800G! An > excessive amount of essentially unused space just so root can juggle > some things around when the file system is "full" according to an > unpriviledged user. > > I'm not sure I agree that xfs is worth a mention. If you need what it > can do, it's awesome, but it always seemed to me a specialized fs > outside of the normal and routine. Or maybe I just move in the wrong > circles. > > btrfs is far more relevant than xfs imho. These days I use FreeBSD much > more than Linux and there ZFS rules. I can't imagine doing anything > resembling containerization (term used very loosely) without it, and > btrfs filling that niche in Linux-land. I do agree that ZFS is not > appropriate for a Linux exam as long as the licensing question remains > in place. > > -- > Alan McKinnon > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > lpi-examdev mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
