On Sun, Oct 29, 2000, John W. De Boskey wrote:
Hi,
I ran into an interesting gotcha with fsck and vinum...
I have the following line in /etc/fstab:
/dev/vinum/raid5/pubufs rw 2 2
and during an upgrade (old current to current), I
Hi,
I ran into an interesting gotcha with fsck and vinum...
I have the following line in /etc/fstab:
/dev/vinum/raid5/pubufs rw 2 2
and during an upgrade (old current to current), I commented the
line out during the reboot process. After
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, John W. De Boskey wrote:
I ran into an interesting gotcha with fsck and vinum...
I have the following line in /etc/fstab:
/dev/vinum/raid5/pubufs rw 2 2
and during an upgrade (old current to current), I commented
As pointed out by mr Sobolev, the fsck wrappers will blindly try to execute
fsck_$FS regardless of whether its there or not, and fail if it isn't.
This is a gotcha for non-fsck'able fses right now, such as nfs and ntfs.
The solution, which I forgot to add in my email, is to set pass to 0
On Sun, Sep 24, 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Sun, Sep 24, 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote:
The trouble is that some of the FS strings have spaces in their filenames.
This might confuse a few people.
How about mapping spaces to '_' characters - I doubt it would cause any
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000, Bruce Evans wrote:
Well, if you have any suggestions, I'm all for it. :-)
I don't understand the problem. You get the filesystem type name
(fstypename) from fs_vfstype in struct fstab or from f_fstypename in
struct statfs. You attempt to execute
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Here's the patch:
--- fsck.c.orig Sat Dec 23 11:13:30 2000
+++ fsck.c Sat Dec 23 11:13:34 2000
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@
errx(1,
On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Sun, Sep 24, 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote:
The trouble is that some of the FS strings have spaces in their filenames.
This might confuse a few people.
How about mapping spaces to '_' characters - I doubt it would cause any
namespace
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000, Boris Popov wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
So now is a problem which I'm sure the NetBSD people came up against.
The fstypenames are names like 4.2BSD, vinum, ISO9660, etc. NetBSD fixed
this by
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Here's the patch:
--- fsck.c.orig Sat Dec 23 11:13:30 2000
+++ fsck.c Sat Dec 23 11:13:34 2000
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@
errx(1, "partition `%s' is not of a legal vfstype",
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I've updated my fsck wrappers patchset to the latest netbsd and freebsd
fsck patches. I'd appreciate some feedback on them before I run off
and commit them (with my mentor, of course.)
For those who aren't in the know, the general idea
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
So now is a problem which I'm sure the NetBSD people came up against.
The fstypenames are names like 4.2BSD, vinum, ISO9660, etc. NetBSD fixed
this by creating a new list 'mountnames[]', which maps the fs type to
a string.
Probably a hard
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000, Boris Popov wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
So now is a problem which I'm sure the NetBSD people came up against.
The fstypenames are names like 4.2BSD, vinum, ISO9660, etc. NetBSD fixed
this by creating a new list 'mountnames[]', which maps the fs
On Fri, Dec 22, 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I've updated my fsck wrappers patchset to the latest netbsd and freebsd
fsck patches. I'd appreciate some feedback on them before I run off
and commit them (with my mentor, of course.)
For those who aren't in the know, the general idea
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000, Boris Popov wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
So now is a problem which I'm sure the NetBSD people came up against.
The fstypenames are names like 4.2BSD, vinum, ISO9660, etc. NetBSD fixed
this by
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000, Boris Popov wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000, Boris Popov wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
So now is a problem which I'm sure the NetBSD people came up against.
The fstypenames are names like 4.2BSD,
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Here's the patch:
--- fsck.c.orig Sat Dec 23 11:13:30 2000
+++ fsck.c Sat Dec 23 11:13:34 2000
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@
errx(1, "partition `%s' is not of a legal vfstype",
str);
- if ((vfstype =
I've updated my fsck wrappers patchset to the latest netbsd and freebsd
fsck patches. I'd appreciate some feedback on them before I run off
and commit them (with my mentor, of course.)
For those who aren't in the know, the general idea is that a single wrapper
program spawns a FS-specific fsck
I've integrated fsck and fsck_ffs into my local world tree, and
make buildworld/installworld seems to work ok. I've shifted the
tarball and diff to http://www.freebsd.org/~adrian/fsck/ . Can
people please prod it and see what I've missed ?
Thanks,
Adrian
--
Adrian Chadd
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Anatoly Vorobey writes:
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 01:42:33PM +0200, Adrian Chadd wrote:
* the rest of the system treats ffs filesystems as "ufs". Besides the
fact that I dislike this, I decided against the NetBSD way of
Isn't it time, anyway, to fix this? This
few months,
then discontinue it.
Thats one thing that has always bugged me too, but I was thinking about
fixing that after the fsck wrappers. Thinking in hindsight, it might be
easier to change ufs to ffs in the fsck wrapper right now, and then
once the wrapper is stable worry about moving ufs
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Watching my machine boot, the parallel nature of this fsck is now
confusing the output, eg:
Automatic reboot in progress...
** /dev/ad0s1a
** Last Mounted on /
** Root file system
** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes
de0: enabling 10baseT port
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Watching my machine boot, the parallel nature of this fsck is now
confusing the output, eg:
Automatic reboot in progress...
** /dev/ad0s1a
** Last Mounted on /
** Root file system
** Phase 1 -
I've ported the NetBSD fsck wrapper to compile and run under FreeBSD.
Its probably still very rough, but I'm going to spend the next few
days tidying it up. I have also modified our fsck (and renamed it
fsck_ffs) to fit this new framework.
The source tarball can be found at:
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 01:42:33PM +0200, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I've ported the NetBSD fsck wrapper to compile and run under FreeBSD.
Can you summerize what this does, or does better than what we do today?
--
-- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 01:42:33PM +0200, Adrian Chadd wrote:
I've ported the NetBSD fsck wrapper to compile and run under FreeBSD.
Can you summerize what this does, or does better than what we do today?
The idea is the same as mount and its
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 09:59:15PM -0400, Brian Hechinger wrote:
but isn't there wisdom in implementing the wrapper as well? we won't be
using ffs forever (log based file system please!! *G*)
Sure there is, I'm all for the wrapper. I just want "ufs is really ffs"
to go away as well, and am
27 matches
Mail list logo
