Re: btrfsck errors is it save to fix?

[Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>]

Kai Krakow posted on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 20:37:57 +0100 as excerpted:

>>> BTW, my first impression was that "errors 400" means something like
>>> "400 errors" - but that is just a hex bitmask which shows what errors
>>> have been found. So "errors 100" is just _one_ bit set, thus only
>>> _one_
>>> error.
>> 
>> Same impression here, tho I did wonder at the conveniently even number
>> of errors...  Perhaps "errors" should be retermed "error-mask" or some
>> such,
>> to make the meaning clearer?
> 
> Of course the numbers are even because they are powers of two:

That's what I meant:  Once I read that they were bit-flags and thus 
powers of two represented in octal or hex, it made sense.  Before that, I 
had idly/sub-consciously wondered why errors "coincidentally" seemed to 
always occur in nice round batches of X-hundred, etc, but it hadn't yet 
risen to a level of consciousness where I was even aware what it was that 
seemed odd about it -- that only happened in hindsight once I read the 
bitflags explanation and realized what had been subconsciously bothering 
me about the "too round" numbers I was interpreting them as, before.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman