Re: document ext3 requirements

Pavel Machek
2009-01-03T22:28:18Z

On Sat 2009-01-03 22:17:15, Duane Griffin wrote:
> [Fixed top-posting]
>
> 2009/1/3 Martin MOKREJŠ <mmokrejs@ribosome.natur.cuni.cz>:
> > Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> readonly mount does actually write to the media in some cases. Document that.
> >>
> > Can one avoid replay of the journal then if it would be unclean?
> > Just curious.
>
> Nope. If the underlying block device is read-only then mounting the
> filesystem will fail. I tried to fix this some time ago, and have a
> set of patches that almost always work, but "almost always" isn't good
> enough. Unfortunately I never managed to figure out a way to finish it
> off without disgusting hacks or major surgery.

Uhuh, can you just ignore the journal and mount it anyway?
...basically treating it like an ext2?

...ok, that will present "old" version of the filesystem to the
user... violating fsync() semantics.

Still handy for recovering badly broken filesystems, I'd say.

Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html