| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: right way to report bugs |
| From: | Jan Derfinak <ja@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 13 Dec 2005 00:05:34 +0100 (CET) |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, overby@xxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <439DC63E.8030101@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.61.0512121150540.11817@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <439DC63E.8030101@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Eric Sandeen wrote: Hello. > In the past I have used xfs_db to change the nblocks or nextents for this > inode to match (usually both 0), and re-run repair. Not the best solution I > know, but one possible way out of the problem. Thanks. Your advice works. It rescued fs. > But in this case, it's xfs_repair's job to fix inconsistent things; I don't > know why it bails out on this one. We've found a couple of other cases like > this recently as well. Hmm, it would be nice to have algorithm from your advice in xfs_repair. Thanks, again. jan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: right way to report bugs, Jan Derfinak |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: right way to report bugs, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: right way to report bugs, Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | XFS accessing arch-specific structures, David Howells |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |