Hi! > > Alan, this is FUD. Our V3 fsck was written after everything else was, > > for lack of staffing reasons (why write an fsck before you have an FS > > worth using). As a result, there was a long period where the fsck code > > was unstable. It is reliable now. > > > > People often think that our tree makes fsck less robust. Actually fsck > > can throw the entire internal tree away and rebuild from leaf nodes, and > > frankly that makes things pretty robust. > > I did a series of tests well after resier3 had fsck that consisted of > modelling the behaviour of systems under error state. I modelled random > bit errors, bit errors at a fixed offset (class ram failure), sector 4 > byte slip (known IDE fail case) and sectors going away.
Do you have that code somewhere? Best I could do was overwriting random parts of partition with random data, you seem to have "more interesting" failures... Pavel -- teflon -- maybe it is a trademark, but it should not be.