disklabel/newfs problem?

2007-08-06 Thread btmarshall
x27;ve run this on a vanilla 4.1 install, as well as a stable kernel/userland upgraded as of last night. Any clues? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/disklabel-newfs-problem--tf4226020.html#a12021995 Sent from the openbsd user - misc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: disklabel/newfs problem?

2007-08-06 Thread Otto Moerbeek
on > ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes > ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames > ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity > ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts > ** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups > 1 files, 1 used, 8200710 free (14 frags, 1025087 blocks, 0.0% fragmentation) > > UPDATE STANDARD SUP

Re: disklabel/newfs problem?

2007-08-06 Thread btmarshall
Mounted on >> ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes >> ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames >> ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity >> ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts >> ** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups >> 1 files, 1 used, 8200710 free (14 frags, 1025087 blocks, 0.0% >> fragmentation) &

Re: disklabel/newfs problem?

2007-08-06 Thread Otto Moerbeek
3156832, > >> # fsck /dev/sd0a > >> ** /dev/rsd0a > >> BAD SUPER BLOCK: MAGIC NUMBER WRONG > >> > >> LOOK FOR ALTERNATE SUPERBLOCKS? [Fyn?] y > >> > >> USING ALTERNATE SUPERBLOCK AT 32 > >> ** File system is already clean >