Re: rebuild fs
Oleg Drokin wrote: Hello! On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:56:55PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote: rephrase that as, use 3.6.11, if it still fails, tell us, the segfault will at least be fixed regardless of whether fsck has enough data to do its job. But it was not failing on the IDE drive anyway. I don't understand the relevance of your statement to mine. Since after transferring image to IDE made reiserfsck to not fail (and it failed on raid5 due to raid errors, I think), your if it still fails statement was not adequate., Even with a broken hard drive, there should be no userspace segfault or am I wrong? Current problem is that not everything is restored and some important files were lost. Now, I know that recently we introduced some serious changes in reiserfsck and now if the block have some slight corruption, it is not immediately discarded, but fsck actually tries to extract some useful data out of it if it think this is really reiserfs metadata block. That's why newer reiserfsck might achieve better results. Bye, Oleg -- Hans
Re: rebuild fs
in this case (IO error) reiserfsck does abort() which ends up as signal number 5, and core is dumped if this is allowed. Looks pretty much like segfault too. Though a message is printed prior to this that we cannot read some block. Bye, Oleg yuck. vs, complain to vitaly please. It does not look the same as the user gets different messages on the terminal. With hardware problems like IO errors he gets Aborting, although this can dump the core file also. But what a user should not get even with the broken hardware is Segmentation fault messages. And core dumping is what looks really pretty much the same. As some old version of reiserfsck (3.6.3) stopped unexpectedly, Oleg suggested to use the latest one -- 3.6.11 -- which worked ok for now. Regarding IO errors reiserfsck prints Block ## cannot be read before aborting and the last ones suggest to check the hardware also. BTW, if there are some bad blocks I would advise to use dd_rescue instead of dd as dd has some problems with bad blocks handling. -- Thanks, Vitaly Fertman
Re: rebuild fs
well, the segmentation fault was with version 2.6.3 from knoppix CD. After I kopied the drive to IDE i used a debian unstable dist to run reiserfsck. I think i rember the version was 2.6.8. Here it run without foult but i didn't run it again against the raid system. Menawhile I compiled the version 2.6.11 but is still running so currently I have no result
Re: rebuild fs
Hello! On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:56:55PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote: rephrase that as, use 3.6.11, if it still fails, tell us, the segfault will at least be fixed regardless of whether fsck has enough data to do its job. But it was not failing on the IDE drive anyway. I don't understand the relevance of your statement to mine. Since after transferring image to IDE made reiserfsck to not fail (and it failed on raid5 due to raid errors, I think), your if it still fails statement was not adequate. Current problem is that not everything is restored and some important files were lost. Now, I know that recently we introduced some serious changes in reiserfsck and now if the block have some slight corruption, it is not immediately discarded, but fsck actually tries to extract some useful data out of it if it think this is really reiserfs metadata block. That's why newer reiserfsck might achieve better results. Bye, Oleg
Re: rebuild fs
Hello! On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:28:15PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote: But while rebuilding the tree, I got a segmentation fault. Because I didn't want to continue work on the original raid system, I copied the entire raid disk to the IDE disk. dd if=/dev/rd/c0d0 of=/dev/hda conv=noerror,sync I tried to rebuild the fs structure again, and I was able to access many files, but not that are important to me :( Does there is anyting I can do in this state ? does other tools then resierfsck exist ? If you are not using latest fsck version (3.6.11 as of now), try to use reiserfsprogs 3.6.11, as there is slight chance it would do better. rephrase that as, use 3.6.11, if it still fails, tell us, the segfault will at least be fixed regardless of whether fsck has enough data to do its job. But it was not failing on the IDE drive anyway. Bye, Oleg
