On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 16:40 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
> Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> 
> > There have been a lot of bug fixes since then, but I wouldn't 
> > know off the top of my head anything specific that would explain this.
> > 
> >> I tried upgrading to 1.1.11, but had to back down to 1.1.7 as the new
> >> utils  refused to do an fsck.
> > 
> > What error did you get?  There's no reason 1.1.11 should have failed.
> 
> I'm pretty certain it said something about the superblock, but I didn't
> take note.  I can probably reproduce it, but is there any point?

Not if you're moving up to a new system.  I'm a bit curious though.

> > Do you have any plans to upgrade to a newer distribution?  JFS has
> > gotten a lot more stable in the 2.6 kernel than it was back in 2.4. 
> 
> Yep, I've been preparing a new system since this morning.  Latest 2.6
> kernel.  
> The fsck is still running, but I've been able to copy the key files to
> the new system, later I hope to be able to recover as much as possible
> of the data.  
> 
> > I'm pretty impressed that it's been holding up this long under such a
> > high load.
> 
> Well, looks like it wasn't holding up all that well ... 

I think you'll have better luck on a modern kernel.  I trust you'll let
me know if any new problems show up.

Thanks,
Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion

Reply via email to