| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Lost+found |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 9 Apr 2008 09:29:45 -0400 |
| Cc: | Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Barry Naujok <bnaujok@xxxxxxx>, Jeffrey Sandel <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <47FCC071.40201@sandeen.net> |
| References: | <1207632033.11530.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <op.t9bm23aa3jf8g2@pc-bnaujok.melbourne.sgi.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.0804090628080.322@p34.internal.lan> <47FCC071.40201@sandeen.net> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) |
On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 08:11:13AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > The whole reason they're in lost+found is because they are "orphaned" - > allocated & in use but not referenced by any directory... so the best > xfs_repair can do is rename to lost+found with the inode number. At least until we get parent pointers. Niv, any updates? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Lost+found, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Is my partition repairable?, James Klaas |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Lost+found, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Lost+found, Niv Sardi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |