Re: [PATCH] 030: fix for new xfs_repair versions

[Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>]

On 04/10/12 13:56, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 03/31/12 18:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Given that we now drop invalid unlinked inode lists there is no message
>> to capture. Also add a sed expression to avoid failures on old repair
>> versions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig<hch@lst.de>
>>
>
>
> This is something that worked on an older OS:
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
> ---
> 030 | 3 ++-
> 030.out.linux | 1 -
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Index: b/030
> ===================================================================
> --- a/030
> +++ b/030
> @@ -55,7 +55,8 @@ _check_ag()
> for structure in 'sb 0' 'agf 0' 'agi 0' 'agfl 0'
> do
> echo "Corrupting $structure - setting bits to $1"
> - _check_repair $1 "$structure"
> + _check_repair $1 "$structure" |
> + sed -e '/^error following ag 0 unlinked list$/d'
> done
> }
>
> Index: b/030.out.linux
> ===================================================================
> --- a/030.out.linux
> +++ b/030.out.linux
> @@ -85,7 +85,6 @@ bad agbno AGBNO for inobt root, agno 0
> root inode chunk not found
> Phase 3 - for each AG...
> - scan and clear agi unlinked lists...
> -error following ag 0 unlinked list
> - process known inodes and perform inode discovery...
> - process newly discovered inodes...
> Phase 4 - check for duplicate blocks...
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

ping.

People are still listing 030 as broken. We should get this fixed.

--Mark Tinguely

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs