Geert Uytterhoeven dixit: >On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 04:34, Finn Thain <[email protected]> wrote:
>> It doesn't matter what the clock says if root is read-only. I think the problem is that the root filesystem is never really read-only because the kernel does journal replays and things like that, too eatly (there was quite some discussion around this, and tytso never saw the error because he was west of UTC or something like that). >> What issue? Why not just run hwclock before filesystem checks? > >Isn't the check on the rootfs done _before_ hwclock runs? I think that distributions run hwclock, check filesystems, then run hwclock again, even. But, see above, it may not be enough. I seem to recall an answer from that discussion simply saying to “fix your clock”, so, it may be the kernel that needs to set the correct time (and timezone). Does the MacOS store the timezone, anyway? (In BSD we have it compiled in the kernel… while that can be changed on a compiled kernel like Linux rdev could, it isn’t the nicest way either.) bye, //mirabilos -- [...] if maybe ext3fs wasn't a better pick, or jfs, or maybe reiserfs, oh but what about xfs, and if only i had waited until reiser4 was ready... in the be- ginning, there was ffs, and in the middle, there was ffs, and at the end, there was still ffs, and the sys admins knew it was good. :) -- Ted Unangst über *fs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
