Eric Baldeschwieler wrote:
Why not go after the FS APIs so you can simply read the remaining good blocks? Might it work already if you had a client that skipped a block if it found a missing one (via error/exception)? Or create empty blocks...
Well, this version of fsck is an interim solution anyway. Currently corrupted files can't be processed, so we need a way to weed them out, and possible recover as much data as possible from the leftovers.
My point is that we have no other way to do it now. If/when the missing block handling improves so that it doesn't kill jobs, we can change this part of fsck to simply move files; for now I think a middle-ground solution (additional -recover option) would be better.
-- Best regards, Andrzej Bialecki <>< ___. ___ ___ ___ _ _ __________________________________ [__ || __|__/|__||\/| Information Retrieval, Semantic Web ___|||__|| \| || | Embedded Unix, System Integration http://www.sigram.com Contact: info at sigram dot com
