From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: rebuild fs Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 17:28:25 +0400 Message-ID: <3F2FB0F9.5020001@namesys.com> References: <20030805104546.GA22557@namesys.com> <3F2FA2DF.3050505@namesys.com> <20030805125431.GE13689@namesys.com> <3F2FA997.20101@namesys.com> <20030805131723.GH13689@namesys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20030805131723.GH13689@namesys.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Oleg Drokin Cc: Thorsten Mauch , "'reiserfs-list@namesys.com'" Oleg Drokin wrote: >Hello! > >On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:56:55PM +0400, Hans Reiser wrote: > > > >>>>rephrase that as, use 3.6.11, if it still fails, tell us, the segfault >>>>will at least be fixed regardless of whether fsck has enough data to do >>>>its job. >>>> >>>> >>>But it was not failing on the IDE drive anyway. >>> >>> >>I don't understand the relevance of your statement to mine. >> >> > >Since after transferring image to IDE made reiserfsck to not fail (and it failed on raid5 due to raid errors, >I think), your "if it still fails" statement was not adequate., > Even with a broken hard drive, there should be no userspace segfault.... or am I wrong? >Current problem is that not everything is restored and some important files were lost. >Now, I know that recently we introduced some serious changes in reiserfsck and now >if the block have some slight corruption, it is not immediately discarded, but fsck actually >tries to extract some useful data out of it if it think this is really reiserfs metadata block. >That's why newer reiserfsck might achieve better results. > >Bye, > Oleg > > > > -- Hans