lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: ext3 vs resiserfs vs xfs
At 19:12 07/11/2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > when coming back up it fscked (I didn't touch anything - didn't even
> notice
> > any 5 second thing but I wasn't looking at this screen) and it found two
> > lost inodes (I got two entries in lost and found). So it still needs to
> > fsck by the looks of it?
>
>That sounds like you used your own kernel with it and had ext2 mounting
>the root fs (remember its back compatible)

Yes, that makes a lot of sense. After the reset I went into my own kernel
with both ext2 and ext3 compiled into it. However, before the reboot, I was
still in the RH kernel (99% sure it was so, but my memory might be
deceiving me).

Is there any Right Way(TM) to fix this situation considering I want to have
both ext2 and ext3 in my kernels (apart from the obvious of changing the
order fs are called during root mount in the kernel)?

Thanks,

Anton


--
"I've not lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere." - Unknown
--
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS Maintainer / WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/
ICQ: 8561279 / WWW: http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:12    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans