similar to: e2fsck -p vs -y

Is it practical to get a R/W file handle opened against an existing file on an unmounted ext2 filesystem? -- Chuck Wolber Electronic Flight Bag Crew Information Systems/ Linux Wonk 253.576.1154 "You can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards." --Steve Jobs

Hello, on my ext3 fs I have a file that I can not modify anymore: $ who am i root pts/0 Nov 18 19:42 (192.168.10.110) $ ls -al /mnt/path/usage_200306.html -rw-r-xrw- 1 50946 nobody 99935 Jul 1 2003 /mnt/path/usage_200306.html $ rm /mnt/path/usage_200306.html rm: remove regular file `/mnt/path/usage_200306.html'? y rm: cannot remove `/mnt/path/usage_200306.html': Operation

e2fsck returns 1 in case of "file system errors corrected". We treat it as success in normal e2fsck, but fail if e2fsck is run by resize2fs. Change 'manual' execution of e2fsck to dedicated function call. --- daemon/ext2.c | 14 ++++---------- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/ext2.c b/daemon/ext2.c index 5dd67c7..95a65ae 100644 ---

Helping a friend fix a computer that was having severe, weird troubles. Reformatted (from XP) and installed Fedora. Install went ok, on first boot, however, filesystem was READONLY for some reason. Knew hard drive was suspect, so I e2fsck'd it over and over all night long, fall asleep next to the computer. This morning, Fedora boots fine, login not a problem, so I shut down and fsck it again,

On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 08:54:24PM -0700, Keith Keller wrote: > > Heh, I like your understatement. :) I think this helps answer part of > my questions in my second email: I should probably try to preserve > changes from last backup before getting too deep into a tricky e2fsck. > At one point the fs was still mountable, so I could have tried to copy > files off first. (In a

Hi I'm experiencing some problems on a harddisk (it has crashed for no known reason), and in pursuit of getting some of the data out of the disk I'm learning to use the e2fs progs package. Origianlly I used version 1.38, but after experiencing segfaults in e2fsck -which now is solved, I upgraded to 1.39, but now I have hit another problem (on another partition): The partition was

* "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> hat geschrieben: Hi Theodore. > That being said, it's pretty clear that portions of the inode table > and block group descriptor was badly corrupted. [...] Keith is not the first one with problems of this class and he will probably not be the last one. He later told us, that at first, mounting the file system still worked. And that

Does Automount/autofs automagically run e2fsck? If so, how does one disable this? We have an external USB connected 2TB hard drive setup to automount. Sometimes e2fsck gets fired up, I think from Automount. I have this line in the automount config: /backupdisk -fstype=ext3,nocheck :LABEL=BACKUP I believe this should prevent Automount from running e2fsck, but it still runs it. (We

Hi there, I started getting errors on one of my 2 drives, so I got a warranty one. Then I made an exact copy of the failing one onto the new one with dd, and swapped them. I ran fsck on all the affected partitions, and things looked good. Then I started using the striped RAID device (ext3) which had some minor data loss (mostly under big files), and I got the problems with the journal. The

We have CENTOS 5.5 run on DELL server.?? Due to power system crash, server been down and up. I would like use 'e2fsck" to check file systems. Does there has way to run "e2fsck" under following conditions: 1. file systems are all ext3 2. file systems must mount. 3. e2fsck only scan file system but NO modify Thanks.

On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:46:02 +0100 (BST) John Hodrien <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jul 2016, Gabriele Pohl wrote: > > I now changed the value to 0 and rebooted. > > > > After that fsck based on Interval setting were done. > > > > Unfortunately that is not true for the root partition. > > For that I had to use maxCount settings to

* Keith Keller <kkeller@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> hat geschrieben: Hi Keith > I have a very similar second server which has undergone a similar chain > of events, an initial ~2.5tb fs followed by a resize later. I believe > that it has been fsck'd since the resize (but don't quote me on that). > Am I likely to run into this issue with this fs? And if I do, what >

(There really doesn't seem to be a dedicated e2fsprogs list, so this was the next-best place I could find. I don't place much faith in the sourceforge forums..) The filesystem in question is a 480 gig ext3 partition, on a hardware RAID5 controller. It's approximately 90% full, with something like 115K files. Kernel 2.4.20-pre4, on a Duron 900. As I type this, e2fsck has used up

I posted this to the Fedora-list, but thought I might get some additional information here as well. I have a HD that refuses to mount with a 'bad magic number in super-block'. I'm running FedoraCore 6 x86_64. [root at moe ~]# fdisk -l /dev/hdc Disk /dev/hdc: 250.0 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

Hi, Somehow I've managed to get e2fsck to seg fault.. The filesystem in question started acting very strangely (e.g. filenames changing from music to MuSiC etc) so I rebooted, and since when fsck has crashed every time it has been run. I'm not really sure what any of this means, so I didn't know what debugging output to include, but below is the output of e2fsck. (I would have

hi, i have a tricky situation here and and don't know where to start with the solution. i happened to set up a linux system, but i had to install the base system on another machine. i used e2fsprogs 1.30-WIP (30-Sep-2002) for this. now the machine is up and running, but i have to use e2fsprogs 1.27 (8-Mar-2002). it's a debian system and i wanted to stay sane & stable, hence using

Hi, yesterday I ran e2fsck -n on a mounted file system and got: /dev/sdb1 contains a file system with errors, check forced. According to Ted, the lines that followed were not to be trusted due to the fact that the file system was mounted. But this error statement suggests to run a check with the fs unmounted. Today, we scheduled a downtime and ran the check. It came of completely clean: ~:

Hi! I had problem yesterday with e2fsck. It reported a bad superblock. I then tried to use one of the other superblocks. To no avail. Then later I remembered that I had switched the fs type to xfs. Maybe e2fsck could recognize other common fs types, and report this instead? best regards keld

Hi again all, I apologize for not asking this in my first message; I just remembered the question after sending. On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 07:43:12PM -0700, Keith Keller wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 09:05:09PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > Unfortunately, there has been a huge number of bug fixes for ext4's > > online resize since 2.6.32 and 1.42.11. It's

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 16:21:00 +0100 (BST) John Hodrien <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jul 2016, Gabriele Pohl wrote: > > > on all of my CentOS7 VMs on different hypervisors > > the config file e2fsck.conf contains the line > > > > broken_system_clock = 1 > > > > Do you see similiar /default/ settings on > > your machines? Is