Hi!
On Son, 19 Mai 2002 14:28:01 Pixel wrote:
> it used to be "unsafe" to use dosfsck. That's why it was better not to
> check fat's. This may have changed (i don't see any mention of danger
> in dosfsck)
Well, ok, dosfsck says, it's still alpha for fat32.
And it is probably wise to let window
Michael Reinsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it intentional that /sbin/fsck.vfat is missing from dosfstools?
> /sbin/dosfsck is present, only the symlink to /sbin/fsck.vfat (and
> /sbin/fsck.msdos) is IMHO missing.
it used to be "unsafe" to use dosfsck. That's why it was better not to
check
Hi!
Is it intentional that /sbin/fsck.vfat is missing from dosfstools?
/sbin/dosfsck is present, only the symlink to /sbin/fsck.vfat (and
/sbin/fsck.msdos) is IMHO missing.
--
Michael Reinsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://mr.uue.org
--