small problem configuring and installing reiser4progs

2003-08-27 Thread Tupshin Harper
I just downloaded and installed reiser4progs-0.4.12 and libaal-0.4.9. This was the first install of either of these, and I ran into the following problem: configured and make installed libaal-0.4.9 configure of reiser4progs ends with the following: checking whether -falign-loops works... yes chec

Bonnie++ comparison

2003-08-27 Thread Tupshin Harper
FWIW, I have done a bonnie++ (the fast version with -f parameter) comparison on all of the major linux filesystems, including reiser4, reiser3, jfs, xfs, ext2, ext3, and ext3 in writeback mode. View in a mono-spaced font for legibility. These were done on an Athlon with 1Gb of ram, the partitio

Re: small problem configuring and installing reiser4progs

2003-08-27 Thread Steven Cole
On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 19:11, Tupshin Harper wrote: > I just downloaded and installed reiser4progs-0.4.12 and libaal-0.4.9. > This was the first install of either of these, and I ran into the > following problem: > configured and make installed libaal-0.4.9 > configure of reiser4progs ends with th

Re: small problem configuring and installing reiser4progs

2003-08-27 Thread Yury Umanets
On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 05:11, Tupshin Harper wrote: > I just downloaded and installed reiser4progs-0.4.12 and libaal-0.4.9. > This was the first install of either of these, and I ran into the > following problem: > configured and make installed libaal-0.4.9 > configure of reiser4progs ends with th

Re: small problem configuring and installing reiser4progs

2003-08-27 Thread Tupshin Harper
Yury Umanets wrote: On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 05:11, Tupshin Harper wrote: I just downloaded and installed reiser4progs-0.4.12 and libaal-0.4.9. This was the first install of either of these, and I ran into the following problem: configured and make installed libaal-0.4.9 configure of reiser4prog

Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.

2003-08-27 Thread Ian Wienand
On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 02:22:33PM +0400, Oleg Drokin wrote: > Fixed some bugs. And finally reiser4 should compile on 64bit boxes > (hm. somebody try it, as I am unable to build any 2.6 kernel for > ia64). I built this with IA64 2.6.0-test4, it works but there were lots of warnings (I can put up a

Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.

2003-08-27 Thread Yury Umanets
On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 09:52, Ian Wienand wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 02:22:33PM +0400, Oleg Drokin wrote: > > Fixed some bugs. And finally reiser4 should compile on 64bit boxes > > (hm. somebody try it, as I am unable to build any 2.6 kernel for > > ia64). > > I built this with IA64 2.6.0-tes

Re: write barrier patches for 2.4.21

2003-08-27 Thread Oleg Drokin
Hello! On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 05:46:24PM -0400, Tom Vier wrote: > anyone working on scsi wb's? there was a long thread on l-k about wb's, but > i wasn't aware what came of it. There was a discussion about that on Kernel Summit 2003 and general opinion was that SCSI does not need the WB stuff a

Re: 2.6.0-test4 reiserfs oops

2003-08-27 Thread Oleg Drokin
Hello! On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 03:59:20PM +, Lorenzo Allegrucci wrote: > > > > > I have got this oops running fsstress and fsx-linux > > > > > on a 20Gb reiserfs partition. Fully reproducible. > > > > What are the options to fsx and fsstress? > > > fsx-linux linux-2.5.0.tar.bz2 :) > > > mkdir

Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.

2003-08-27 Thread Oleg Drokin
Hello! On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:28:44PM +0200, Diego Calleja Garc?a wrote: > btw, I suppose this feature will be removed if/when reiser4 is merged?: > config REISER4_FS_SYSCALL > bool "Enable reiser4 system call" No. It will be fixed. > dmesg errors: > (fs/ext3/inode.c, 2728): ext3_wr

Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.

2003-08-27 Thread Felipe Alfaro Solana
On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 08:03, Yury Umanets wrote: > > > > Information: Reiser4 is going to be created on /dev/sda5. > > (Yes/No): Yes > > Creating reiser4 on /dev/sda5... > > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f7661 > > mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access

problem with a bad block in bitmap table

2003-08-27 Thread Ragnar Hojland Espinosa
One of my HDs at home is dying, bad blocks (and other nastiness) appeared, and I can't mount it to recover whatever I might, as it complains on a bad block (32768) on a rather unfriendly place: Reiserfs super block in block 16 on 0x342 of format 3.6 with standard journal Count of blocks on the dev

Re: problem with a bad block in bitmap table

2003-08-27 Thread Vitaly Fertman
Hi, On Wednesday 27 August 2003 17:20, Ragnar Hojland Espinosa wrote: > One of my HDs at home is dying, bad blocks (and other nastiness) > appeared, and I can't mount it to recover whatever I might, as it > complains on a bad block (32768) on a rather unfriendly place: > > bread: Cannot read the

Re: problem with a bad block in bitmap table

2003-08-27 Thread Ragnar Hojland Espinosa
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 06:28:45PM +0400, Vitaly Fertman wrote: > this is unfortunatelly the block the reiserfs keeps its system info in, > and there is no way to relocate it or just mark as bad. Ugh. May I suggest the obvious, adding this into reiserfss new versions.. > Have you tried to write

Re: reiser4 snapshot for August 26th.

2003-08-27 Thread Hans Reiser
Felipe Alfaro Solana wrote: On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 08:03, Yury Umanets wrote: Information: Reiser4 is going to be created on /dev/sda5. (Yes/No): Yes Creating reiser4 on /dev/sda5... mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned access to 0x600242f2, ip=0x200f7661 mkfs.reiser4(5676): unaligned a

kdev_t usage fix for reiser4

2003-08-27 Thread Christophe Saout
Hi! I got reiser4 working with the 64 bit kdev_t patch. You are not allowed to use kdev_val except for hashing purposes. Also the kdev_t should not be used outside the kernel. That's what dev_t is for. I've attached a patch that fixes the usage in a bunch of places. But I would also vote to use

Re: write barrier patches for 2.4.21

2003-08-27 Thread Tom Vier
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 10:41:03AM +0400, Oleg Drokin wrote: > There was a discussion about that on Kernel Summit 2003 and general opinion was that > SCSI > does not need the WB stuff at all as it does the correct thing anyway. i found this, but no real details. do you have a better link? or coul