| To: | Spam Magnet <spam.wax@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 29 May 2008 17:19:57 -0500 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3607657a0805291446t79808c63l664780c1cbc3d871@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <3607657a0805291005k457791cej1c5f867da0f95965@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <483EE5BD.8020407@xxxxxxxxxxx> <3607657a0805291255i59fd006fi9d6836cf528d19a6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <483F0BC3.2050901@xxxxxxxxxxx> <3607657a0805291400h3c50165lea6fbea919deed0f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <483F1AED.3010808@xxxxxxxxxxx> <3607657a0805291446t79808c63l664780c1cbc3d871@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Macintosh/20080421) |
Spam Magnet wrote: >> try xfs_repair -n then maybe. Or update xfsprogs. check shouldn't >> segfault, regardless of the fs state. >> > > I updated xfsprogs to the latest version (cvs checkout) and it solved > the segfault. > >> nah that's fine, images or disks, whichever. >> > > So I guess it doesn't matter if I do the image either using dd or xfsdump. > I'd prefer dd since I get a lot of issues trying to compile xfsprogs under > Irix. > > Assuming that I get an image using dd, would a simple mount command suffice > to use the xfs utils ? : > $ mount -t xfs -o loop disk.img /mnt that's fine, assuming your dd was of the partition that actually held the xfs fs. -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed, Spam Magnet |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed, Stefan Smietanowski |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed, Spam Magnet |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS: SB validate failed, Stefan Smietanowski |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |