Re: UFS file system problem in either stable or current
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Valentin Nechayev wrote: Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 03:14:33, strick (Dan Strick) wrote about UFS file system problem in either stable or current: DS There seems to be an inconsistency between release 4.9-RC and 5.1 ufs DS support. If I fsck the same ufs (type 1 of course) file system on DS both releases, each claims that the other has left incorrect DS summary data in the superblock. Presumably only one can be correct. DS I just don't know which to blame. Does this require explicit fsck? I have dual-booting between 4.9-release (and all previous 4.* releases earlier) and 5.1 (of 20030526) with shared disks and boot checking required in fstab; sometimes one of them crash and forced checking is made; neither 4.* nor 5.1 claims superblock is bad. You wouldn't notice after a crash. The incompatibility turns out to be the location and perhaps details of the summary information (e.g. number of free blocks) in the superblock. This does not affect the integrity of the file system. It does affect the output of the df command. The first time you run fsck on a file system after modifying it when running the other operating system, fsck will probably find inconsistent super block summary data. fsck -p will correct it without asking (and might not even say much about it). I recently read something in one of the FreeBSD newsgroups that suggests that this incompatibility between 4.x and 5.x has in some sense been corrected in -current. I don't know any details. See also: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=446102+449665+/usr/local/www/db/text/2003/freebsd-current/20031102.freebsd-current Dan Strick [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: UFS file system problem in either stable or current
Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 03:14:33, strick (Dan Strick) wrote about UFS file system problem in either stable or current: DS There seems to be an inconsistency between release 4.9-RC and 5.1 ufs DS support. If I fsck the same ufs (type 1 of course) file system on DS both releases, each claims that the other has left incorrect DS summary data in the superblock. Presumably only one can be correct. DS I just don't know which to blame. Does this require explicit fsck? I have dual-booting between 4.9-release (and all previous 4.* releases earlier) and 5.1 (of 20030526) with shared disks and boot checking required in fstab; sometimes one of them crash and forced checking is made; neither 4.* nor 5.1 claims superblock is bad. -netch- ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: UFS file system problem in either stable or current
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, 11:18+0200, Valentin Nechayev wrote: Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 03:14:33, strick (Dan Strick) wrote about UFS file system problem in either stable or current: DS There seems to be an inconsistency between release 4.9-RC and 5.1 ufs DS support. If I fsck the same ufs (type 1 of course) file system on DS both releases, each claims that the other has left incorrect DS summary data in the superblock. Presumably only one can be correct. DS I just don't know which to blame. Does this require explicit fsck? I have dual-booting between 4.9-release (and all previous 4.* releases earlier) and 5.1 (of 20030526) with shared disks and boot checking required in fstab; sometimes one of them crash and forced checking is made; neither 4.* nor 5.1 claims superblock is bad. mckusick's answer: http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=100639+0+archive/2003/freebsd-current/20030323.freebsd-current Dan's PR: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=misc/58373 -- Maxim Konovalov, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: UFS file system problem in either stable or current
On Tuesday 28 October 2003 08:42 am, Dan Strick wrote: On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 06:23:20 -0500, Peter Schultz wrote: Dan Strick wrote: There seems to be an inconsistency between release 4.9-RC and 5.1 ufs support. If I fsck the same ufs (type 1 of course) file system on both releases, each claims that the other has left incorrect summary data in the superblock. Presumably only one can be correct. I just don't know which to blame. ... There is no problem AFAIK, you just have to fsck with the matching executable. A lot has changed with FreeBSD 5, spend some time with the -current archive and you will learn more. I'm sure you noticed how your findings are consistently inconsistent. Thanks for the pointer. I eventually found at least part of the discussion in the -current archive. I interpret the discussion as follows: The 5.x UFS1 file system turns out to be slightly incompatible with earlier UFS file systems. The problem is only that it keeps the summary data in a different location in the superblock, but that is sufficient to make the file systems incompatible. There seems to be no interest in making them compatible. I need them to be compatible if possible. I'm working on a few related problems, so I'm becoming more familiar with the code. I'm willing to help if you have an approach in mind. Do you know why the change was made? Suggestion: if FreeBSD 5 used a different clean flag and FreeBSD 4/5 always cleared the other's clean flag whenever they rewrote a superblock, the file systems would automatically be refscked whenever you switched between operating systems but not after a normal reboot. If somebody does so, please don't use the fs_state field; I have a local patch that uses that for a different (incompatible) purpose that I'd like to commit soon. -- Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket? Wes Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: UFS file system problem in either stable or current
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 06:23:20 -0500, Peter Schultz wrote: Dan Strick wrote: There seems to be an inconsistency between release 4.9-RC and 5.1 ufs support. If I fsck the same ufs (type 1 of course) file system on both releases, each claims that the other has left incorrect summary data in the superblock. Presumably only one can be correct. I just don't know which to blame. ... There is no problem AFAIK, you just have to fsck with the matching executable. A lot has changed with FreeBSD 5, spend some time with the -current archive and you will learn more. I'm sure you noticed how your findings are consistently inconsistent. Thanks for the pointer. I eventually found at least part of the discussion in the -current archive. I interpret the discussion as follows: The 5.x UFS1 file system turns out to be slightly incompatible with earlier UFS file systems. The problem is only that it keeps the summary data in a different location in the superblock, but that is sufficient to make the file systems incompatible. There seems to be no interest in making them compatible. Suggestion: if FreeBSD 5 used a different clean flag and FreeBSD 4/5 always cleared the other's clean flag whenever they rewrote a superblock, the file systems would automatically be refscked whenever you switched between operating systems but not after a normal reboot. Dan Strick [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
UFS file system problem in either stable or current
There seems to be an inconsistency between release 4.9-RC and 5.1 ufs support. If I fsck the same ufs (type 1 of course) file system on both releases, each claims that the other has left incorrect summary data in the superblock. Presumably only one can be correct. I just don't know which to blame. I couldn't find a FreeBSD problem report about bad summary data. I will submit one, but since FreeBSD 4.9 is about to be released, someone might like to check this out. I happen to have multiple FreeBSD operating systems installed on the same computer. This might also be an issue if you move an external disk between computers. I don't know if the problem shows up on all file systems. It seems to happen on all the half dozen or so of the file systems that my 4.9-RCx and 5.1 systems share. Dan Strick [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: UFS file system problem in either stable or current
Dan Strick wrote: There seems to be an inconsistency between release 4.9-RC and 5.1 ufs support. If I fsck the same ufs (type 1 of course) file system on both releases, each claims that the other has left incorrect summary data in the superblock. Presumably only one can be correct. I just don't know which to blame. I couldn't find a FreeBSD problem report about bad summary data. I will submit one, but since FreeBSD 4.9 is about to be released, someone might like to check this out. I happen to have multiple FreeBSD operating systems installed on the same computer. This might also be an issue if you move an external disk between computers. I don't know if the problem shows up on all file systems. It seems to happen on all the half dozen or so of the file systems that my 4.9-RCx and 5.1 systems share. There is no problem AFAIK, you just have to fsck with the matching executable. A lot has changed with FreeBSD 5, spend some time with the -current archive and you will learn more. I'm sure you noticed how your findings are consistently inconsistent. Pete... ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
