From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerrit Hannaert Subject: Re: Corruption: --fix-fixable results in all nlink values = 0 Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 22:02:08 +0200 Message-ID: <200208152202.08611.degerrit@web.de> References: <200208152007.42370.degerrit@web.de> <200208152253.40413.vitaly@namesys.com> <20020815194425.GA21232@shuttle.mothership.home.dhs.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20020815194425.GA21232@shuttle.mothership.home.dhs.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com On Thursday 15 August 2002 21:44, Stefan Fleiter wrote: > Hi Vitaly! > > On Thu, 15 Aug 2002 Vitaly Fertman wrote: > > Ah, I guess I know what happened. I think you have some fatal corruptio= ns > > and rebuild-tree is required. In this case check and fix-fixable do not > > perform semantic check. > > Then reiserfsck should not start in fix-fixable mode when rebuild-tree is > required. > People think that fix-fiable is less dangerous. You have shown in some > situations it is the other way round... > > I propos a new reiserfsck version with only this fix included! > > Greets, > Stefan I admit the warning in the man page wasn't scary enough to me and led me to= =20 believe it was less dangerous, and thus worth a try first. It also seems better to me to not allow fix-fixable to run in situations where it will no= t run=20 properly (ie where a rebuild-tree is required) Ciao, =2D Gerrit "--fix-fixable This option recovers certain kinds of corruption that do not require rebui= lding the entire file system tree (--rebuild-tree). Normally you only need this option if the --check option= reports "corruption that can be fixed with --fix-fixable". This includes: zeroing invalid data-block pointers, co= rrecting st_size and st_blocks for directories, and deleting invalid directory entries."