Launchpad has imported 7 comments from the remote bug at
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462804.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment
will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about
Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at
** Package changed: ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) = util-linux (Ubuntu)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/58430
Title:
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy
This is not a bug: it is working as intended since the repair may cause
data loss, it really does need manual user intervention, likely with a
backup being made first.
** Changed in: util-linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Invalid
--
You received this bug notification because you are a
hi gays plz help me
i have a fedora 11 server and its not booting up
how to repair the os without data loss
plz help me gays and my mail id is cnu...@gmail.com
thanks
srinivas
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy inconsistency
Bad Karma Koala
I migrated from Windows to 9.04 and had 2 months of blissfully stable
computing. I even got my can't do without legacy Windows programs going in
VirtualBox. I upgraded to 9.10 successfully on one machine without difficulty,
but on the machine with my accounting software
As a post script to the acerbic comment to the effect that those who
failed to back up somehow deserve all of this, I do have all my data
intact, it is the cost in time and aggravation of redoing all of this
again. It doesnt have to be made automatic just make the choices
clearer as to what to
This happened to a friend of mine today. She had to phone me, and I had
to explain to her about the 'fsck -y'. It wasn't even clear to me what
was wrong, she just said it says it can't mount a filesystem, on the
phone.
So, yes, making this process easier for non-expert people, a simple
yes/no
** Changed in: fedora
Status: In Progress = Won't Fix
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy inconsistency
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/58430
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
** Bug watch added: Red Hat Bugzilla #462804
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462804
** Also affects: fedora via
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462804
Importance: Unknown
Status: Unknown
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy
** Changed in: fedora
Status: Unknown = In Progress
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy inconsistency
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/58430
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
** Changed in: ubuntu-meta (Ubuntu)
Sourcepackagename: None = ubuntu-meta
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy inconsistency
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/58430
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
The best route for practically all users is probably fsck -y. Yes,
there's a tiny chance that a) fsck will break something AND b) that
something happens to be important to the user AND c) the user could have
done better manually BUT d) they didn't bother backing up AND e) they
didn't know that
I'm nominating this proposed fix for Intrepid for the drivers to
consider whether they like the fix (changing -p to -y). I assume it's
not necessary to allocate any resources to figure out how to implement
it, i.e., I assume it's a one-line change somewhere.
--
Command-line recovery required
And if there's some tool out there that is better at recovering data
than fsck, why not investigate running that tool instead (or maybe in
addition to fsck).
Anyways, asking and making it CRYSTAL CLEAR and DEAD SIMPLE what needs
to be done to get back to a working state is better than what's
lost+found is useful, and people should be reminded that it is there.
But there is a lot of info that fsck spews out, like directory names and
inodes, that is currently not seen again as far as I know. Sounds like
a separate bug on fsck (or user education :-) might be in order, but
nevertheless I
Hi,
what about doing fsck umounting the HD? I found that lot of people advice that
in other forums.
Additionaly, in
Ubuntu Forums The Ubuntu Forum Community Main Support Categories
General Help
Manual Fsck
a more safe procedure is adviced:
sudo touch /forcefsck sudo reboot
Is
Please don't just fsck automatically for folks.
This just happened to me, and I ended up with a broken system by
following the directions and running fsck and having to hold down the
enter key for a LONG time while ominous messages flew by offering to
remove illegal blocks, duplicate blocks, etc.
fsck puts all data that can be salvaged in lost+found, right? Other than
that, is it really useful to dump the disk image for any other purpose
but debugging?
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy inconsistency
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/58430
You received this
I think the reasoning is wrong here.
so, we are in the situation that fsck recovery could trigger data loss.
so, it's dangerous.
question is... what is the alternative for the user?
who is going to repair a filesystem corruption in any other way than fsck?
ever? I mean... basically there is
Why even ask? Seriously... who would answer anything but yes to fsck's
questions?
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy inconsistency
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/58430
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is the bug
I also think the Importance should be bumped because, as Emmanuel said,
it renders the system unusable for many users.
--
Command-line recovery required when fsck reports an unexpectedy inconsistency
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/58430
You received this bug notification because you are a
Matt, shouldn't we allow people to do that and confirm they understand
the risk on the same prompt ? That is, when detecting such an error
occurred, we offer the user to run the manual fsck and have him attend
to the critical , possibly involving data loss error by fsck.
--
Command-line recovery
The reason the system requires that fsck be run manually in this case is
that there is the possibility of data loss/corruption during the repair.
Where errors can be automatically corrected without this risk, fsck
simply corrects them without prompting the user.
** Summary changed:
- fsck error
23 matches
Mail list logo
