From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o7FMhOmt205551 for ; Sun, 15 Aug 2010 17:43:25 -0500 Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 2F3E8170DF55 for ; Sun, 15 Aug 2010 15:43:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from enyo.dsw2k3.info (enyo.dsw2k3.info [195.71.86.239]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id n6RMuQLV75otcYry for ; Sun, 15 Aug 2010 15:43:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 00:43:41 +0200 From: Matthias Schniedermeyer Subject: Re: xfs.fsck change that is unhelpful Message-ID: <20100815224341.GA9438@citd.de> References: <4C670101.8050901@tlinx.org> <20100815005240.GH10429@dastard> <4C674AE8.7030107@tlinx.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C674AE8.7030107@tlinx.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Linda Walsh Cc: xfs-oss On 14.08.2010 19:03, Linda Walsh wrote: > > > Dave Chinner wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 01:48:01PM -0700, Linda A. Walsh wrote: >>> Some time ago, when I upgraded a system, I ran into problems when >>> it hit a file system that was offline. It wasn't a critical >>> partition, so it normally wouldn't have been an issue, but somewhere >>> along the line >>> someone mangled fsck.xfs. >> >> fsck.xfs is behaving identically to e2fsck when presented with an >> invalid block device - it exits with an error of 8, which is defined >> as "operational error" in the e2fsck man page. > --- > That may be fine for the ext2 fs, but I am asserting that in actual > practice, with xfs, it does more harm than good. I would suggest using autofs, so that you can keep fstab to an absolut minimum. Except for devices related to booting, i personally mount everything either with autofs or manually(In that case it's normaly a one-shot thing). In my case that are all "non boot related" devices, DVD-drive, network filesystems, some "tmpfs"es for playing, removable-devices, etc. Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs