search for: e2progs

guestfsd calls many different tools. Keeping track of all of them is error prone. This patch introduces a new helper macro to put the command string into its own ELF section: GUESTFS_EXT_CMD(C_variable, command_name); This syntax makes it still possible to grep for used command names. The actual usage of the collected list could be like this: objcopy -j .guestfs_ext_cmds -O binary

From: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> Tweak the error message "e2fsck -f" and "e2fsck -fy". Indicate the user to use the correct and/or forceall options. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/ext2.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/ext2.c b/daemon/ext2.c index

From: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> Tweak the error message "e2fsck -f" and "e2fsck -fy". Indicate the user to use the correct and/or forceall options. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/ext2.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/ext2.c b/daemon/ext2.c index

Tweak the error message "e2fsck -f" and "e2fsck -fy" to "e2fsck-f" and "e2fsck-fy". Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/ext2.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/ext2.c b/daemon/ext2.c index 79fd354..9fe938e 100644 --- a/daemon/ext2.c +++ b/daemon/ext2.c

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755729 This bug reports that the error message printed by the resize2fs API calls (which comes directly from the resize2fs command) says: Please run 'e2fsck -f /dev/vda1' first. That command is not possible from guestfish (where it would be 'e2fsck-f' or 'e2fsck ... forceall:true'). Fixing that bug caused this bug:

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 04:07:39PM +0300, Nikita A Menkovich wrote: [...] Thanks, I have pushed a modified version of this patch upstream: http://git.annexia.org/?p=libguestfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=4ffa2d6798f7a2bf0baec8e1084659cf6358bc31 Rich. > diff --git a/daemon/ext2.c b/daemon/ext2.c > index 725352e..85ce316 100644 > --- a/daemon/ext2.c > +++ b/daemon/ext2.c > @@ -266,6

...an indirect block. The guessing, and the fact that some blocks may have been reused unfortunately means that there may be errors in the salvaged files. So check them afterwards. The code is alpha and has only been tested on a Linux i386 system Salvage is an addition to the debugfs program in the e2progs package by Ted Ts'o. Download: http://www.dkuug.dk/keld/e2fsprogs-1.38-ks1.tar.gz. Then follow INSTALL instructions. Author: Keld Simonsen, keld at dkuug.dk

Optimizations by reducing the STREQ operations and do some code cleanup. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/mkfs.c | 29 +++++++++++++---------------- 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/mkfs.c b/daemon/mkfs.c index a2c2366..7757623 100644 --- a/daemon/mkfs.c +++ b/daemon/mkfs.c @@ -44,13 +44,16 @@ do_mkfs_opts (const

This miscellaneous patch adds bindings for: - ntfsfix - ntfsclone - ntfslabel and unifies filesystem label setting through a single API 'set-label' which replaces 'set-e2label' and is also able to set labels on NTFS using the ntfslabel program. 'ntfsfix' has been added as a possible way to fix RHBZ#797760. However I have not found a way to fully fix this bug. See

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.

At the moment OpenStack uses kpartx and nbd to resize filesystems and inject files to guests. I sincerely hope they don't allow untrusted users to upload guest images / AMIs :-( To fix this I'm looking into adding libguestfs support as an optional backend in OpenStack. The only missing feature in libguestfs is the ability to call tune2fs on a filesystem. This patch series adds tune2fs

These two patches are probably not completely independent, but separating them is a lot of work. With *both* patches applied, all the tests and extra-tests pass. That's no guarantee however that there isn't a mistake, so I don't think this patch is a candidate for the 1.16 branch, until it's had a lot more testing in development. Rich.