On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 15:46, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 03:39:37PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> > Unfortunately major(s.st_rdev) is probably useless, try to mount any
>> > btrfs device :-)
>>
>> Yeah, it was about fsck only, not mount. :)
>
> Hmm... I'm talking about fsck, try
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 03:39:37PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 15:27, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> >> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poetteri
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 15:27, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
>> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
>> >> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@s
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:15:29PM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> >> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
> >>
> >> > You really don't want to
On Wed, 02.11.11 15:19, Karel Zak (k...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > I guess, if such broken configs should be supported, which I'm really
> > > not sure about, fsck itself should be made to find that out and return
> > > successful without doing anything. Such things should not be guarded
> > > in sy
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 12:55:56PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 02.11.11 12:15, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> > >> On Thu, 27.10.
On Wed, 02.11.11 12:15, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> >> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
> >>
> >> > You really don't
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:21, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
>> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
>>
>> > You really don't want to fsck a tmpfs, even if passno is non-null (it
>> > was causing many issu
Le mardi 01 novembre 2011 à 16:54 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit :
> On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
>
> > You really don't want to fsck a tmpfs, even if passno is non-null (it
> > was causing many issue, forcing system to go to emergency).
>
> Hmm, I wonder i
On Thu, 27.10.11 16:19, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
> You really don't want to fsck a tmpfs, even if passno is non-null (it
> was causing many issue, forcing system to go to emergency).
Hmm, I wonder if this is the right fix. I wonder what fsck -a does if it
finds a passno != 0 for
You really don't want to fsck a tmpfs, even if passno is non-null (it
was causing many issue, forcing system to go to emergency).
--
Frederic Crozat
SUSE
>From cca125c2758b48ba8f1afdc4b5751b104f0bd809 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Frederic Crozat
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:36:57 +0200
Subject: [
11 matches
Mail list logo