On Wed, 2005-08-17 at 21:11 +0200, evilninja wrote: > Dave Kleikamp schrieb: > >>After that, 'fsck.jfs -v' delivered the following for all (important) > >>partitions: > >>fsck.jfs version 1.1.7, 22-Jul-2004 > > @Dave: > would it be worth anything to try a current (1.1.8) version of jfsutils > here and in similiar cases?
It couldn't hurt, but I'd be surprised if it made a difference. 1.1.8 is more forgiving of corruption in a specific reserved inode, but I don't think that is the case here. > i've read the changelog but i fail to see if > attempts were made to make jfs_fsck better at "guessing" how the > filesystem should actually look like and fix errors like this. i did not > have any serious jfs errors for the last months now, but "CANNOT CONTINUE" > messages from fsck.* programs are not good, methinks. CANNOT CONTINUE is not good. Sometimes it means that the file system really is too damaged to fix. I'm sure there are cases where fsck could be smarter and repair is possible. > thank you for your time, > Christian. -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ Jfs-discussion mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
