Um, just wondering... I have a file system, on which I have run xfs_repair six times, and xfs_check still has complaints about it. I understand the xfs_repair rebuilds lost+found every time, so it ke
linux@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Um, just wondering... I have a file system, on which I have run xfs_repair six times, and xfs_check still has complaints about it. I understand the xfs_repair rebuilds lost+f
Er... does this imply that I should try to mount the file system? I haven't been doing that until it checks out clean. Or is there some other way to rename the lost+found directory? Should I try 2.7
Well, xfsprogs 2.7.3 produces a much cleaner xfs_repair output, with no link count messages in phase 7, but xfs_check still thinks there's something wrong: block 2/262 expected type unknown got free
Okay, with xfsprogs 2.7.3, I found one minor bug: /# xfs_check -V Usage: xfs_check [-fsvV] [-l logdev] [-i ino]... [-b bno]... special and moving /lost+found to /lost+found2 produces a clean xfs_rep
Two more cfs_repair runs, the second of which ended in a segfault. Note that these are like the 11th and 12th time I've run xfs_repair on the same 150 GB file system. Maybe I should just go back to e
This means you haven't seen e2fsck turning a mountable (with inaccesible files) filesystem into a complete mess, no longer mountable. The same e2fsck finishing also with segfault... Regards, Iustin
linux@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Two more cfs_repair runs, the second of which ended in a segfault. Note that these are like the 11th and 12th time I've run xfs_repair on the same 150 GB file system. Maybe I
Um, just wondering... I have a file system, on which I have run xfs_repair six times, and xfs_check still has complaints about it. I understand the xfs_repair rebuilds lost+found every time, so it ke
linux@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Um, just wondering... I have a file system, on which I have run xfs_repair six times, and xfs_check still has complaints about it. I understand the xfs_repair rebuilds lost+f
Er... does this imply that I should try to mount the file system? I haven't been doing that until it checks out clean. Or is there some other way to rename the lost+found directory? Should I try 2.7
Well, xfsprogs 2.7.3 produces a much cleaner xfs_repair output, with no link count messages in phase 7, but xfs_check still thinks there's something wrong: block 2/262 expected type unknown got free
Okay, with xfsprogs 2.7.3, I found one minor bug: /# xfs_check -V Usage: xfs_check [-fsvV] [-l logdev] [-i ino]... [-b bno]... special and moving /lost+found to /lost+found2 produces a clean xfs_rep
Two more cfs_repair runs, the second of which ended in a segfault. Note that these are like the 11th and 12th time I've run xfs_repair on the same 150 GB file system. Maybe I should just go back to e
This means you haven't seen e2fsck turning a mountable (with inaccesible files) filesystem into a complete mess, no longer mountable. The same e2fsck finishing also with segfault... Regards, Iustin
linux@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: Two more cfs_repair runs, the second of which ended in a segfault. Note that these are like the 11th and 12th time I've run xfs_repair on the same 150 GB file system. Maybe I