On 2020-01-31 12:57, Ottavio Caruso via wrote:
On 31/01/2020 10:22, Kai Peter wrote:
Hi,
in a former question there was confirmed that the monitor command
'quit' is similar to unplug the power cable. Now, for modern operating
systems it is recommended to shutdown them (and not to switch off the
power supply). Thus the filesystem(s) will be unmounted cleanly to
avoid file system errors.
The question is: _Could_ it happen that I get filesystem errors if I
use 'quit' in the monitor? Especially for ext4 and ntfs filesystems?
I assume it _could_ happen, but can someone confirm please or not?
Really, it's just like pulling the plug while the system is running.
Not sure about ntfs, but journalled ext4 will give you some level of
protection. fsck will kick in at boot time, if the partition is marked
as (fs_passno) 1 or 2 in fstab. Will fsck recover bad sectors?
Probably, but why risk? Just use system_powerdown.
If the booted image is a cdrom or a read-only hd, then "q" won't
(probably) do any damage.
Thanks for reply, as well thanks Garcia.
So maybe a bit background. IMHO the usage the word "quit" in the monitor
is a bit dangerous. I usually redirect the monitor to a unix/tcp socket.
To disconnect from such a socket I use (usually) STRG+C. That's ok so
far. But I think it is a common case to use 'quit' or 'exit' to close
the _connection_. Example: If I connect via telnet to a to a smtp server
I type 'quit' to close the connection, but I do NOT kill/quit the
server. This is different with the qemu monitor. Even if the _function_
'quit' is a required one for qemu I would like to have a different
wording. Perhaps 'kill' would be an alternative?
Just my thoughts.
Kai
--
Sent with eQmail-1.10.3 beta - a fork of djb's famous qmail