Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Should\s+xfs_repair\s+make\s+xfs_check\s+stop\s+complaining\?\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 4 Nov 2005 18:46:48 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00032.html (26,471 bytes)

2. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:53:37 -0600
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00034.html (10,806 bytes)

3. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 4 Nov 2005 22:27:47 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00036.html (9,470 bytes)

4. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 5 Nov 2005 01:21:49 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00037.html (16,961 bytes)

5. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 5 Nov 2005 02:19:15 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00038.html (18,400 bytes)

6. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 6 Nov 2005 02:11:57 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00039.html (12,892 bytes)

7. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: Iustin Pop <iusty@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:19:25 +0200
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00040.html (9,607 bytes)

8. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:53:27 -0600
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00041.html (9,165 bytes)

9. Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 4 Nov 2005 18:46:48 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00187.html (26,471 bytes)

10. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:53:37 -0600
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00189.html (10,806 bytes)

11. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 4 Nov 2005 22:27:47 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00191.html (9,470 bytes)

12. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 5 Nov 2005 01:21:49 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00192.html (16,961 bytes)

13. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 5 Nov 2005 02:19:15 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00193.html (18,400 bytes)

14. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: linux@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 6 Nov 2005 02:11:57 -0500
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00194.html (12,892 bytes)

15. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: Iustin Pop <iusty@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:19:25 +0200
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00195.html (9,607 bytes)

16. Re: Should xfs_repair make xfs_check stop complaining? (score: 1)
Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:53:27 -0600
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
/archives/xfs/2005-11/msg00196.html (9,165 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu