On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 09:41:36AM -0500, David Masover wrote:
And personally, if it was my FS, I'd stop working on fsck after it was
able to check. That's what it's for. To fix an FS, you wipe it and
restore from backups.
If that's Reiser4's philosophy, just make sure you tell all of your
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 12:18:46PM -0600, Jonathan Briggs wrote:
I use Reiser3 and Reiser4 on all my systems and fsck has always worked
even if it has been much slower than I would like. The only problems
I've experienced have been on the same level as when an ext2/3
filesystem fsck dumps
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 04:15:41PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 23:28:12 +0400, Roman I Khimov said:
--nextPart1692600.LIfSYN1P7A
Maybe I'm doing something wrong here, but ext2 have failed on second check
of first pass with
Second check...
e2fsck 1.34
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 09:51:33AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
Do you have working fsck for V4? Until then, you should not claim that
users should switch. Journalling does not help you, if you have
unexpected kernel problem or hardware trouble, fsck _is_ mandatory.
Can V4 survive few hours of
Rule #3 from http://www.streamload.com/About/Legal_eng.asp?page=id73#
is pretty clear about what applies if you have a trial account (which
seems to be what you have since you say you'll cancel your account if
they charge you anything):
3. Do not circumvent Freeloader download restrictions.
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 04:12:38PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
Streamload cannot warrant and does not guarantee, and You
should not expect, that all of Your private communications and
other personal information will never be disclosed in ways not
otherwise described in this
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 12:21:38PM +0300, Markus T?rnqvist wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 11:34:50PM -0400, Horst von Brand wrote:
David Masover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Hans (or someone) decided that when hardware stops working, it's
not the job of the FS to compensate, it's the
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 10:19:01AM -0500, David Masover wrote:
XFS has similar issues where it assumes that hardware has powerfail
interrupts, and that the OS can use said powerfail interrupt to stop
DMA's in its tracks on an power failure, so that you don't have
garbage written to key
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 03:18:30PM -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
I presume Ted is referring to problems guaranteeing the integrity of
the journal at recovery time. I am coming into this without all the
available context, so I may be barking up the wrong tree In
particular, I am not sure how
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 12:46:23PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
A difference between us is
that I tell them that with all the major linux filesystems (I include
XFS and JFS in this) it is by this time far more likely to be hardware
that caused corruption than the filesystem software, whereas I
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 12:23:41PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
assert(trace_hash-89, is_hashed(foo) != 0);
Lots of people like corporate anonymity. Some don't. I don't. I like
knowing who wrote what. It helps me know who to pay how much. It helps
me know who to forward the bug
On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 12:21:18PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
There is an area where we suffered from writing fsck last. When there
are two leaf nodes with the same key range AND the bitmap cannot be
trusted to tell us which is the valid one, we don't know which is the
most recent, and pick
12 matches
Mail list logo
