[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: How errorproof is ext2 fs?
Alan Cox wrote:
> > due to an not responding USB-keyboard/-mouse (what a nice coincident). Now while
> > the Mac restarted without any fuse I had to fix the ext2-fs manually for about
> > 15 min. Luckily it seems I haven't lost anything on both system.
> >
> > This leaves me a bad taste of Linux in my mouth. Does ext2 fs really behave so
> > worse in case of a crash? Okay Linux does not crash that often as MacOS does, so

> That sounds like it behaved well. fsck didnt have enough info to safely
> do all the fixup without asking you. Its not a reliability issue as such.

Well, fsck wants to ask

"Found an unattached inode, connect to lost+found?"

to the user and will interrupt an automatic reboot for that.

This is bad: The safe choice is safe: It won't cause data-loss.

Maybe it should report it (say by Email), but interrupting a reboot
just for connecting a couple of files to lost+found, that's

If it would give me enough information when I do this manually, I'd
make an informed decision. However, what are the chances of me knowing
that inode 123456 is a staroffice bak-file? So the only way to safely
operate is to link them into lost+found, and then to look at the files


** ** ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
* There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots.
* There are also old, bald pilots.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.064 / U:1.696 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site