similar to: [PATCH] ext: change e2fsck retcode processing during resize

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:

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

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

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

Some of the oldest and most core APIs, reimplemented. This also moves the strange ‘mount_vfs_nochroot’ function into btrfs.c. --- daemon/Makefile.am | 2 + daemon/btrfs.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++ daemon/daemon.h | 6 --- daemon/mount.c | 99 ----------------------------------------------- daemon/mount.ml | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

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: GUESTFSD_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 .guestfsd_ext_cmds -O binary

Good tips. Although I have used llvm-link to merge .bc files together, I guess -flto could optimize the resultant .bc file further. As for the assembly, yes it is an issue. Anyway, I'll try to address those sources which are available for being translated into .bc first. Thanks for your advice, Tim. On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote:

Instead of running them before lanching the appliance with the disks and then uploading the result after root.d hooks run, mount the root in the local temporary directory using FUSE and then run the hooks on the guest. Other than being closer to what diskimage-builder does, it also avoids issues with the extra-data.d scripts assuming to find things already, and we don't error out while trying

Move the OCaml binding to C _exit to an own module. Just code motion, adapting v2v in the process. --- docs/C_SOURCE_FILES | 2 +- mllib/Makefile.am | 5 ++++- mllib/exit-c.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ mllib/exit.ml | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ mllib/exit.mli | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ v2v/Makefile.am | 1 - v2v/changeuid-c.c | 33

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

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

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,

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

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

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

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

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}

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

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

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