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    [W:0.026 / U:183.988 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site