On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:49:34AM +0000, Peter Risdon wrote: > Matthew Seaman wrote: > >Certainly. You will find it better suited to the large filesystems > >you have than UFS1. I also have a vague feeling that background fsck > >is a UFS2 feature, but I can't find documentation to either confirm or > >deny that.
> I'm sure this is right. If one of my 5.* machines has an un-clean > shutdown it states that it is starting background fsck checks as it > completes its boot process. Hmmm... After searching through any number of web pages, I must conclude that background fsck(8) works on all versions of UFS on 5.x. Conclusion drawn this way because if it didn't it would be documented as not working, or there would be any number of messages on mailing lists asking why doesn't it work? Also, background fsck(8) depends on the 'snapshotting' feature of UFS, which comes out of the soft-updates functionality definitely available in both UFS1 and UFS2. One of these days I really must get my hands on a 5.x system. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK
Description: PGP signature