On Tue, 08 Jan 2002 09:52:27 -0600, Steve Lord wrote:
>On Tue, 2002-01-08 at 09:34, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 Jan 2002 09:19:50 -0600, Steve Lord wrote:
>
>> >
>> >This output:
>> >
>> >dir 1426370585 block 8388614 extra leaf entry 62b7eea7 2a89
>> >dir ino 1426370585 missing leaf entry for 62bdaea7/2a89
>
>> Bingo, the missing name is du[45].name = "069746IM.Mrw"
[...]
>> Anything else I should do?
>
>Hmm, explain why the correct hash value for this name is 0x62bdaea7,
>yet we created a leaf entry with the wrong hash value of 0x62b7eea7
A bug in your software? ;-)
>Is there any chance you can create another instance of the problem,
>that version you had repair output for would have been very interesting
>since it was in a single block directory, not a hulking great beast
>like this one is in.
You mean I should destroy this filesystem, re-create a fresh one, and start
the whole copy process again until it finishes without a filesystem shutdown?
Of course I can't guarantee that the conditions will be the same as with the
case you're referring to.
>I presume the name is a legitimate one from the source tree.
No -- it's not!! I just noticed that the CORRECT name would have been
"069746IM.drw" -- it's a Micrografx Designer file, thus the extension "drw."
What does that mean?
--
Verkaufe Original-BMW-Raeder: L I N U X .~.
http://adsl-bergs.rz.rwth-aachen.de/~rabe The Choice /V\
of a GNU /( )\
Generation ^^-^^
|