xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: System crash by use xfs

To: Stephan Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: System crash by use xfs
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:33:54 +0200
Cc: Linux XFS List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20020412101308.A24994@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020412094508.02ca3920@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020412093232.B24739@xxxxxxxxxx> <4.3.2.7.2.20020412094508.02ca3920@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 10:13 12-4-2002 +0200, you wrote:
hi

CC'ing the list.

On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 09:47:37AM +0200, Seth Mos wrote:
> At 09:32 12-4-2002 +0200, Stephan Pfeiffer wrote:
> >dear xfs-users,
> >
> >i used kernel2.4.17-xfs. only one partition on the system is used with xfs.
> >once a process or anything writes to this xfs-partiion my system goes
> >completly down. i have recompile my kernel with gcc2.91.66 how is written
> >here http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/faq.html#hangprocess but it not helps.
> >
> >can anybody help me, please?
>
> What error do you see in the logs (like /var/log/messages) or in dmesg output?
messages had no info about this.

<snip>
No errors

soo much, sorry! i can't see any problem here.

>
> Can you cut and paste the output of the error in the mail perhaps?
> Are you using something like md or lvm on your system?
no

>
> Can you try checking out the latest CVS and see if the problem still exists.
i am not really a linux-profi and don't know about cvs. i used
suse-linux7.3. help this info?

I didn't knew XFS was included in SuSE 7.3, maybe SuSE has a updated kernel with XFS which gives less problems. Since there are no error messages it makes debugging the thing slightly harder.

Does anyone from SuSE know if you ever shipped a kernel with XFS support?

You can get the instructions here:
http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/cvs_download.html

Although that does mean you need to compile your own kernel. Are you familiar with compiling your own kernel?

Cheers
--
Seth
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>