xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: dd of xfs partition does not mount

To: "l.a walsh" <xfs@xxxxxxxxx>, Andries Brouwer <aeb@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: dd of xfs partition does not mount
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:53:26 +1000
Cc: "'Chris Croswhite'" <ccroswhite@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <001301c2fd67$d7b64260$1403a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20030404021852.GF911@frodo> <001301c2fd67$d7b64260$1403a8c0@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.3i
Hi Linda,

On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 05:43:10PM -0700, l.a walsh wrote:
>       It'd be really beneficial/user-friendly if some message could be
> issued in mount about this other that 'generic failure happened'.

As you probably know, by design mount(8) on Linux doesn't know
about the filesystem-specific options like this.

> I've been bitten by this twice, finally remembering the UUID the
> 2nd time around -- it's not something most ext2 users are going to be
> used to, or ISOFS, or many other file systems.
> 
>       Even though a generic status is returned to mount, isn't it possible to
> still spit something out on stderr to the effect of 'attempt to mount
> duplicate UUID', or does 'mount' redirect stderr as well?  Maybe /dev/tty
> would work for interactive terminals and /dev/console otherwise...?
>       It's just easy to forget when one does a bunch of iso or FAT
> copies...and months (and 20-30 other fs copies later), copy another xfs
> fs, and womp...why didn't that work?  If you're lucky, it's not your
> first time and you remember (eventually)...otherwise, it can be a bit
> crazy-making....

Understood.  I think mount could be changed to print something
like "Additional diagnostics can be found in your system log."
or something.  This is not an XFS issue though, so if you want
this, or any other changes to mount, you'll need to discuss it
with Andries (Mr. util-linux).

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


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