From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: rebuild fs Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 17:40:22 +0400 Message-ID: <3F2FB3C6.6000407@namesys.com> References: <20030805104546.GA22557@namesys.com> <3F2FA2DF.3050505@namesys.com> <20030805125431.GE13689@namesys.com> <3F2FA997.20101@namesys.com> <20030805131723.GH13689@namesys.com> <3F2FB0F9.5020001@namesys.com> <20030805133509.GI13689@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: <20030805133509.GI13689@namesys.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Oleg Drokin Cc: Thorsten Mauch , "'reiserfs-list@namesys.com'" , vs Oleg Drokin wrote: >Hello! > >On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 05:28:25PM +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? >> >> > >in this case (IO error) reiserfsck does abort() which ends up as signal number 5, and core is dumped if this is allowed. >Looks pretty much like segfault too. >Though a message is printed prior to this that we cannot read some block. > >Bye, > Oleg > > > > yuck. vs, complain to vitaly please. -- Hans