Displaying 20 results from an estimated 400 matches similar to: "135 GB ext3 on broken drive -- other possibilities than "e2fsck -y"?"
2005 Jan 07
1
135 GB ext3 on broken drive -- other possibilities than "e2fsck -y"?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
No-one out there who can give me any tips for this?
(Then the space to do experiments will finally be used in other ways.
And I hope this mail won't be consired to impolite...)
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 15:23:15 +0100
Milan Holz?pfel <lists at mjh.name> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I got an IDE-drive which decided to get broken. Part of
2005 Nov 22
1
gentoo as dom0 on xen fails...
I wanted to boot gentoo on xen, but it doesn''t work.
What can I do?
Booting ''Xen 3.0.0 / Linux 2.6.12.5''
root (hd0,0)
Filesystem type is ext2fs, partition type 0x83
kernel /xen.gz dom0_mem=131072 com1=115200,8n1
[Multiboot-elf, <0x100000:0x641cc:0x27e34>, shtab=0x18c078, entry=0x100000]
module /vmlinuz-2.6.12.5-xen-0 root=/dev/md0
2007 Nov 29
1
Sharing Partitions between Linux and Windows
Hi All
I've just shifteed over to linux,form Windows.I 'm having 5 partations
for use by my windows XP Professional and another one by linux.The
partation table is as shown :
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[root at localhost6 ~]# fdisk -l
Disk /dev/hdc: 250.0 GB, 250059350016
2007 Dec 09
1
Formating and Mounting Partitions giving problems
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<small>Hi <br>
After the installation of </small><small>Windows and L</small><small>inux
on my desktop.I partitioned the disk space under Windows and kept the
partitions as
2003 Nov 24
0
Re: Still trying to backup 66 GB from LINUX to W2K
Both "rexec.exe" and "rsh.exe" from W2K have the problem.
However, the "rsh.exe" from Hummingbird's Exceed
package works just fine. I copied it into my cygWin's
/usr/bin directory and did
cd /cygdrive/c/temp
time rsh p92 "cd /local;tar cbf 64 - SAS" | dd of=here.tar
and the file is OK. It tars out all the files in SAS
directory.
2014 Sep 07
0
format(object.size(...), units): KB, MB, and GB instead of Kb, Mb, and Gb?
I cannot remember if this has already been discussed or not, and I'm a
bit worried I'm throwing off an endless debate. If it's already
settled, no need to discuss it further.
TOPIC #1:
Shouldn't R use KB, MB and GB when reporting on sizes kilobytes,
megabytes and gigabytes? More specifically, format() for object_size
objects (returned by object.size()) uses Kb, Mb and Gb, which
2007 Feb 27
0
e2fsck -p vs -y
Other than what is printed on STD{OUT|ERR}, is there any functional
difference between the -p and -y arguments in the e2fsck command?
..Chuck..
--
Chuck Wolber
Electronic Flight Bag/ Network File Server
Crew Information Systems/ OSS Wonk
Mobile: 253.576.1154
Desk: 206.655.6918
"21. A person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice
person."
-Dave Barry "25 things
2006 Apr 21
1
problem with e2fsck not knowing xfs
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
2005 Feb 21
1
e2fsck Looping?
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,
2005 Jan 17
0
e2fsck 1.36-rc1 fixes fc3 resize2fs bug
hi,
just wanted to mention that using 1.36-rc1 fixes the following
bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=144771
thanks to benjamin scott for the hint, and theodore ts'o for fixing.
building a source and binary rpm with the provided spec file works
flawlessly under fc3 (just had to remove -rc1 from the archive
name and Version: in the spec file).
if you are replying to
2004 Aug 15
1
e2fsck hangs while recovering journal
Hi,
It seems one of my computers died last night and it looks like hard disk
trouble. I took the disk out and attached to another system and tried to
mount the partition, but the mount doesn't complete and just hangs
(process is also unkillable - I had to reboot).
So, I tried to run "fsck -fccp /dev/sda2" but the command just hangs
after printing "/dev/sda2: recovering
2004 Jun 24
1
Question Regarding e2fsck
I've run ext3 filesystems for the last few years and I've never seen
this question answered..... If a system shutsdown hard, even with
journaling is it at all necessary to run e2fsck?
Just curious.... Thanks
--
Sam Williams samurai at acm.org
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+"It is easy to be
2003 Sep 29
0
ext3 filesystem with directory errors, e2fsck claims to be error free.
I have a bit of a problem with the machine I use at home for backups.
The main partition the backups reside on is a 4 disk RAID-5, totaling
around 240GB.
This has had some sort of corruption inflicted on it, in the content of
the (at least) one directory, where there are now corrupted directory
entries.
This happened after I added an additional SiS PCI IDE controller card to
the machine and put
2003 Sep 29
1
Fsck (presumably e2fsck) returns exit code 127 on an ext3 file sy stem
fsck (Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS 2.1) returns an exit code 127 on an ext3
file system when run from a shellscript started by cron. Here is the
pertinent part of the script:
...
fsck -p /dev/${BK_SLICE} 1>/dev/null 2>&1
STATUS=$?
if [ ${STATUS} -ne "0" ]
then
echo "${MIR_PID}: file system check of /dev/${BK_SLICE} failed, status
= ${STATUS}" >>${LOG}
2008 Jan 21
1
e2fsck version
Hi,
just to do nothing wrong:
for lustre 1.6.0.1 e2fsprogs version: 1.39.cfs8 is recommended.
Can I assume that I can also better use the most recent version which is
recommended for 1.6.4.1 which is e2fsprogs version: 1.40.2-cfs1
Harald
--
Harald van Pee
Helmholtz-Institut fuer Strahlen- und Kernphysik der Universitaet Bonn
2015 Feb 18
1
[PATCH] Fix a bug in e2fsck execution code
Use commandrvf() instead of commandvf() to execute e2fsck. A non-zero
exit status does not always indicate a failure.
Signed-off-by: Nikos Skalkotos <skalkoto@grnet.gr>
---
daemon/ext2.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/daemon/ext2.c b/daemon/ext2.c
index 65ddae6..8ef6d5f 100644
--- a/daemon/ext2.c
+++ b/daemon/ext2.c
@@ -296,9 +296,9 @@ do_e2fsck
2014 Jun 02
0
Re: [long] major problems on fs; e2fsck running out of memory
On Sun, Jun 01, 2014 at 07:43:12PM -0700, Keith Keller wrote:
>
> That's clearly a spurious error, so I checked dmesg:
>
> [159891.225762] EXT4-fs (dm-0): get root inode failed
> [159891.227436] EXT4-fs (dm-0): mount failed
The "get root inode failed" is rather unfortunate.
Try running "debugfs /dev/dm0"
and then use the "stat /" command.
You
2014 Jun 02
0
Re: [long] major problems on fs; e2fsck running out of memory
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
2014 Jun 02
1
Re: [long] major problems on fs; e2fsck running out of memory
* 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
>
2014 Jun 02
0
Re: [long] major problems on fs; e2fsck running out of memory
Hi all,
On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 11:04:52PM +0200, Bodo Thiesen wrote:
>
> 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.
Is there any value in discussing this issue in keeping this broken
filesystem available for debugging purposes? I would like at this