Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2019-03-06 Thread Dmitry Bogatov
[2019-03-02 00:01] Pierre Ynard > Do we want a blacklist, or a whitelist? > Do we want to delegate conditionality to particular implementations? If > so, which factors? Running on battery was suggested. Shipping a dummy > fsck.$type is a way to delegate the possibility or impossibility to fsck

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2019-03-01 Thread Pierre Ynard
Hello, I invite you guys to look inside /etc/init.d/checkroot.sh to see that the check for AC power or battery is actually completely commented out. So as far as battery is concerned, the question is moot, and the filesystem is always checked. The battery check was introduced in #326647 in 2005:

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2018-11-13 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 11:46:31PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > what would you say about getting rid of fsck at boot for most filesystems? The reason why it's important to run fsck at boot is because for many file systems if a file system consistency problem is detected at run time (this might

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2018-11-13 Thread Adam Borowski
[JFS's regular fsck does nothing but, and is needed to, trigger journal replay. If the journal replay is skipped, dirty fs will fail the mount, resulting in a boot failure if / . Being on battery skips fsck.] On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 08:22:09PM +, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > control: tags -1

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2018-11-13 Thread Dmitry Bogatov
control: tags -1 confirmed [2018-11-12 02:03] Adam Borowski > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:20:25AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > > And JFS doesn't do the full check either, it merely apparently needs (or > > more likely needed -- this report is 11¾ years old) only a trigger for the > > journal

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2018-11-12 Thread Ian Jackson
Adam Borowski writes ("Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root"): > Running fsck at boot is useless and harmful for any modern filesystem. > Sure, for ext2 it was needed to at least somewhat reduce data loss you just > suffered, but anything newe

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2018-11-11 Thread Adam Borowski
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:20:25AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > And JFS doesn't do the full check either, it merely apparently needs (or > more likely needed -- this report is 11¾ years old) only a trigger for the > journal replay. > > So I propose: > 1. checking if JFS still needs this Yes, it

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2018-11-11 Thread Adam Borowski
On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 09:08:55PM +, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > [2007-01-29 17:37] Ari Sovijärvi > > The JFS filesystem replays its journal when FSCK is run. Without > > journal replay the filesystem will not allow mount as RW. When running > > on batteries and the root filesystem is JFS, after

Bug#408954: checkroot.sh: should not skip running fsck with JFS root

2007-01-29 Thread Ari Sovijärvi
Package: initscripts Version: 2.86.ds1-36 Severity: normal The JFS filesystem replays its journal when FSCK is run. Without journal replay the filesystem will not allow mount as RW. When running on batteries and the root filesystem is JFS, after a crash the system is left in unusable state since