On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Karol Kwiatkowski wrote: > Ian Smith wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Chris wrote: > > > If its bad to run fsck on a mounted read,write then why does > > > background fsck do it? or you talking about foreground fsck only? > > > > Well I was referring to foreground fsck, and I still don't know why > > running it on a mounted fs is 'bad' when fsck runs in 'NO WRITE' mode > > anyway when it finds a fs is mounted, hence my query above. > > Here's my understanding: > > Mounted fs (rw) isn't in stable state, there may be some writes to it - > daemons, buffers flushes, etc. In this condition fsck can report > inconsistency. And fsck running in 'NO WRITE' won't help anyway :)
a) Absolutely. b) Indeed it usually does, fairly consistently, especially on /var. c) No it won't help (except where it can help locate problems in a real mess like bad blocks), but the assertion in question was, can it hurt? Cheers, Ian _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"