search for: mke4fs

Displaying 10 results from an estimated 10 matches for "mke4fs".

Did you mean: mke2fs
2009 Aug 19
1
[PATCH] mke2fs: Use e4fsprogs programs if available.
...----- >From 7b03d0e1e352dac33c2753bf3aaa8c96a05021de Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones at redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:03:35 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] mke2fs: Use e4fsprogs programs if available. On RHEL 5, mke2fs is ancient, and there is a non-standard "mke4fs" binary which acts like the more recent mke2fs on Fedora. Since there are several annoyances and actual bugs in the ancient RHEL 5 mke2fs, use mke4fs instead if it's available. --- appliance/packagelist.in | 2 + daemon/ext2.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++...
2012 May 23
5
biggest disk partition on 5.8?
...0+ 24540- 24541- 197124430 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 0 - 0 0 0 Empty /dev/sdb3 0 - 0 0 0 Empty /dev/sdb4 0 - 0 0 0 Empty And then make an ext4 filesystem on that : [root at solexa1 StorMan]# mke4fs /dev/sdb1 mke4fs 1.41.12 (17-May-2010) Filesystem label= OS type: Linux Block size=4096 (log=2) Fragment size=4096 (log=2) Stride=0 blocks, Stripe width=0 blocks 12320768 inodes, 49281107 blocks 2464055 blocks (5.00%) reserved for the super user First data block=0 Maximum filesystem blocks=42949672...
2010 Oct 01
2
Format details for a raid partition....
So I have been playing with a RAID 10 f2 ( 2 disks far layout) setup...thanks for all of the advice..Now I am playing with the format and want to make sure I have it setup the best that I can, my raid was built using the raid 10 option with 2 disks with the layout=far, chunk size 512....now I read all of the docs I could find about format and stride and stripe size and this is what i came up
2006 Mar 17
1
[RFC] mke2fs with DIR_INDEX, RESIZE_INODE by default
I've been thinking recently that we should re-enable DIR_INDEX in mke2fs by default. When it first came out, we had done this and were bitten by a few bugs in the code. However, this code has been in heavy use for several thousand filesystem years in Lustre, if not elsewhere, and I'm inclined to think it is pretty safe these days. Likewise, RHEL/FC have had RESIZE_INODE as a standard
2014 Sep 28
2
Re: Why libguestfs guest exist exceptionally?
...fs: send_to_daemon: 84 bytes: 00 00 00 50 | 20 00 f5 f5 | 00 00 00 04 | 00 00 01 16 | 00 00 00 00 | ... guestfsd: main_loop: new request, len 0x50 /dev/sda1: No such file or directory wipefs -a --force /dev/vda1 wipefs: No such file or directory wipefs -a /dev/vda1 wipefs: No such file or directory mke4fs -t ext2 -F /dev/vda1 mke4fs 1.42 (29-Nov-2011) guestfsd: main_loop: proc 278 (mkfs) took 0.41 seconds libguestfs: recv_from_daemon: 40 bytes: 20 00 f5 f5 | 00 00 00 04 | 00 00 01 16 | 00 00 00 01 | 00 12 34 01 | ... libguestfs: send_to_daemon: 68 bytes: 00 00 00 40 | 20 00 f5 f5 | 00 00 00 04 | 00...
2014 Sep 28
0
Re: Why libguestfs guest exist exceptionally?
...0 | 20 00 f5 f5 | 00 > 00 00 04 | 00 00 01 16 | 00 00 00 00 | ... > guestfsd: main_loop: new request, len 0x50 > /dev/sda1: No such file or directory > wipefs -a --force /dev/vda1 > wipefs: No such file or directory > wipefs -a /dev/vda1 > wipefs: No such file or directory > mke4fs -t ext2 -F /dev/vda1 > mke4fs 1.42 (29-Nov-2011) > guestfsd: main_loop: proc 278 (mkfs) took 0.41 seconds > libguestfs: recv_from_daemon: 40 bytes: 20 00 f5 f5 | 00 00 00 04 | 00 > 00 01 16 | 00 00 00 01 | 00 12 34 01 | ... > libguestfs: send_to_daemon: 68 bytes: 00 00 00 40 | 20 00...
2014 Sep 28
2
Re: Why libguestfs guest exist exceptionally?
...00 04 | 00 00 01 16 | 00 00 00 00 | ... >> guestfsd: main_loop: new request, len 0x50 >> /dev/sda1: No such file or directory >> wipefs -a --force /dev/vda1 >> wipefs: No such file or directory >> wipefs -a /dev/vda1 >> wipefs: No such file or directory >> mke4fs -t ext2 -F /dev/vda1 >> mke4fs 1.42 (29-Nov-2011) >> guestfsd: main_loop: proc 278 (mkfs) took 0.41 seconds >> libguestfs: recv_from_daemon: 40 bytes: 20 00 f5 f5 | 00 00 00 04 | 00 >> 00 01 16 | 00 00 00 01 | 00 12 34 01 | ... >> libguestfs: send_to_daemon: 68 bytes:...
2014 Sep 28
2
Re: Why libguestfs guest exist exceptionally?
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 04:30:37PM +0800, Zhi Yong Wu wrote: >> HI, >> >> On a RHEL5 box, i tried to directly run guest which was issued by >> libguestfs virt-xxx commands as below. But after some minutes, it >> exited exceptionally. >> >> Does anyone also hit the
2011 Nov 10
5
[PATCH v2] Add tune2fs command.
The changes since the previous patch: - safe ADD_ARG macro for adding arguments to a fixed size stack array - support for testing functions that return RHashtable, ie. tune2fs-l. - add tests that set (tune2fs) and get (tune2fs-l) various parameters. - only one 'intervalbetweenchecks' parameter (in seconds) Rich.
2012 Aug 30
1
[PATCH] collect list of called external commands
...ize2fs); +GUESTFS_EXT_CMD(str_mke2fs, mke2fs); +GUESTFS_EXT_CMD(str_lsattr, lsattr); +GUESTFS_EXT_CMD(str_chattr, chattr); + /* Choose which tools like mke2fs to use. For RHEL 5 (only) there * is a special set of tools which support ext2/3/4. eg. On RHEL 5, * mke2fs only supports ext2/3, but mke4fs supports ext2/3/4. @@ -39,11 +46,12 @@ * if it exists. */ int -e2prog (char *name) +e2prog (const char *name) { char *p = strstr (name, "e2"); if (!p) return 0; p++; + return 0; *p = '4'; if (prog_exists (name)) @@ -65,11 +73,10 @@ do_tune2fs_l (const char...