If it was mounted it certainly wouldn't qualify as 'inactive', at least by my standards. It is not mounted or being used in any way by the running system.
> -----Original Message----- > From: K?ri Dav??sson [mailto:kd at flaga.is] > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:07 AM > To: pruhland at microwavedata.com; wd at denx.de > Cc: linuxppc-embedded at lists.linuxppc.org > Subject: RE: cramfs root filesystem corruption > > > Inactive meaning "unmounted" or just not beeing used? > > K.D. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Ruhland [mailto:pruhland at microwavedata.com] > > Sent: 31. ma? 2002 14:04 > > To: wd at denx.de > > Cc: linuxppc-embedded at lists.linuxppc.org > > Subject: Re: cramfs root filesystem corruption > > > > 200205301450.50112.pruhland at microwavedata.com> you wrote: > > >> The cramfs image is in flash, mounted as root via mtd blockdevice. > > >> Typically the error occurs during flash reprogramming ( > > > > using mtd char > > > > >> device '/dev/mtd0' ) ...during/after flash programming the cramfs > > >> filesystem 'loses' information ( files disappear ). The > > > > errors from syslog > > > > >> are 'error during decompression', typically the error > > > > numbers ( from > > > > >> 'linux/zlib_fs.h' ) are Z_BUF_ERROR, for the first error, > > > > and Z_DATA_ERROR > > > > >> for the rest. > > > > > > Ummm... can you please explain EXACTLY what you > > > are doing? You have a > > > cramfs in flash, mounted as root, and you are erasing and > > > > overwriting > > > > > the SAME cramfs partition WHILE RUNNING FROM IT? > > > > No, I have redundant cramfs images in flash. I am erasing > > and overwriting the > > inactive image while the other, active image, is mounted as root. > > > > ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
