While watching S. King's IT on tv. tonight... with the wifey ofcourse... I
upgraded my laptop to use ext3.
Once installed, I did a couple of tests... namely... I removed the battery
and then unplugged the wall adpater from the laptop... while in the middle of
a compile session...
Upon reboot, it
On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:25:24 -0500 Jerry McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> While watching S. King's IT on tv. tonight... with the wifey
> ofcourse... I upgraded my laptop to use ext3.
>
> Once installed, I did a couple of tests... namely... I removed the
> battery and then unplugged the wall
On Saturday 08 December 2001 23:25 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
> While watching S. King's IT on tv. tonight... with the wifey ofcourse... I
> upgraded my laptop to use ext3.
>
> Once installed, I did a couple of tests... namely... I removed the battery
> and then unplugged the wall adpater from the l
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:29:01 -0500 Bruce Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Saturday 08 December 2001 23:25 pm, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > While watching S. King's IT on tv. tonight... with the wifey
> ofcourse... I
> > upgraded my laptop to use ext3.
> >
> > Once installed, I did a couple of
On Sunday 09 December 2001 0:40 am, Collins Richey wrote:
> What kind of a backup? If you're doing a logical backup (cp -a or
> some kind of tar), you won't even be aware of the journals. If you're
> doing some sort of an image copy of an active filesystem, even without
> journaling, I would thi
Is it *SAFE* to adopt it by upgrading to 2.4.16?
> Now that ext3 has been merged into the 2.4.x mainline, there's
> absolutely no excuse for being at risk when the unexpected occurs.
> You can convert an ext2 filesystem to ext3 on the fly..
--
The pivotal point is the "second chance", judged
Bruce Marshall wrote:
[...]
% To tape? Question is, what happens when you restore (perhaps from a
% backup system) and then boot the ext3 root. I suppose it all works fine.
Yes, it does. I've had no trouble booting with / on an ext3 FS.
Kurt
--
Alcohol is the anesthesia by which we end
On Sun, 09 Dec 2001 16:26:05 +0800 Chang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it *SAFE* to adopt it by upgrading to 2.4.16?
>
> > Now that ext3 has been merged into the 2.4.x mainline, there's
> > absolutely no excuse for being at risk when the unexpected
> occurs.
> > You can convert an ext2 files
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:42:59 -0700
Collins Richey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
---snip---
> Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> filessystem corruption (all fs types).
>
Collins, is there a specific circumstance that fs corruption occurs? Like
only on systems with sp
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:14:39 -0500 Jerry McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:42:59 -0700
> Collins Richey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> ---snip---
>
> > Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> > filessystem corruption (all fs types).
> >
>
>
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:24:32 -0700
Collins Richey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
---snip---
> it's
> listed as
> " - Alexander Viro: fix unmount inode breakage, show_vfsmnt cleanup".
>
Thanks.
--
**
On Sunday 09 December 2001 9:42 am, Collins Richey wrote:
> Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> filessystem corruption (all fs types).
Interesting.. I've been running ext2 on 2.4.16 for a couple of weeks
now. No problems.
--
+--
I know that 2.4.15 had this problem. I thought they fixed it with 2.4.16.
Jim
On Sunday, December 09, 2001 9:42, Collins Richey wrote:
> Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> filessystem corruption (all fs types).
--
12:42pm up 20 days, 21:46, 2 users, load
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:45:16 -0500 Jim Conner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I know that 2.4.15 had this problem. I thought they fixed it with
> 2.4.16.
>
> Jim
>
> On Sunday, December 09, 2001 9:42, Collins Richey wrote:
>
> > Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> >
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:59:20 -0700 Collins Richey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:45:16 -0500 Jim Conner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > I know that 2.4.15 had this problem. I thought they fixed it with
> > 2.4.16.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > On Sunday, December 09, 2001 9:42, Co
On Sunday, December 09, 2001 1:04, Collins Richey wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:59:20 -0700 Collins Richey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:45:16 -0500 Jim Conner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > I know that 2.4.15 had this problem. I thought they fixed it with
>
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:55:31 -0500 Jim Conner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sunday, December 09, 2001 1:04, Collins Richey wrote:
> > On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:59:20 -0700 Collins Richey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > wrote:
> > > On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:45:16 -0500 Jim Conner
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
On Monday 10 December 2001 00:42, Collins Richey enunciated:
> Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> filessystem corruption (all fs types).
NOT as afar as I know 16 dosen't but 15 did. I an running 16 without problems
as are others here.
--
Keith Antoine aka 'skipp
On Monday 10 December 2001 02:57, Bruce Marshall enunciated:
> On Sunday 09 December 2001 9:42 am, Collins Richey wrote:
> > Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> > filessystem corruption (all fs types).
>
> Interesting.. I've been running ext2 on 2.4.16 for a coup
On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:25:24 -0500
Jerry McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While watching S. King's IT on tv. tonight... with the wifey ofcourse... I
> upgraded my laptop to use ext3.
>
> Once installed, I did a couple of tests... namely... I removed the battery
> and then unplugged the wall a
On Sunday 09 December 2001 16:57, you wrote:
> On Sunday 09 December 2001 9:42 am, Collins Richey wrote:
> > Make sure you get 2.4.16+ (at least 2.4.17-pre1. 2.4.16 causes
> > filessystem corruption (all fs types).
>
> Interesting.. I've been running ext2 on 2.4.16 for a couple of weeks
> no
21 matches
Mail list logo
