RE: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?
Hi, While testing the 4.0 - 5.0 upgrade path, I've created (under 5.0) a UFS1 partition and installed 4.0 onto it. After booting the 4.0 from it, kernel complained about ``numdirs is zero, try using an alternate superblock'' for / partition -- I've tried what it suggests (by fsck -b 32, etc.) but the result was always the same -- the file system was marked dirty and only read-only usable. After rebooting in 5.0, this file system was similarly unusable. Is this a bug or a feature? I've discussed this issue with Poul-Henning Kamp. You need fsck from at least 4.7. Petr Petr Holub CESNET z.s.p.o. Supercomputing Center Brno Zikova 4 Institute of Compt. Science 160 00 Praha 6, CZMasaryk University Czech Republic Botanicka 68a, 60200 Brno, CZ e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: +420-5-41512213 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 01:59:11PM +0100, Petr Holub wrote: Hi, While testing the 4.0 - 5.0 upgrade path, I've created (under 5.0) a UFS1 partition and installed 4.0 onto it. After booting the 4.0 from it, kernel complained about ``numdirs is zero, try using an alternate superblock'' for / partition -- I've tried what it suggests (by fsck -b 32, etc.) but the result was always the same -- the file system was marked dirty and only read-only usable. After rebooting in 5.0, this file system was similarly unusable. Is this a bug or a feature? I've discussed this issue with Poul-Henning Kamp. You need fsck from at least 4.7. Is this handled by fsck/setup.c,v 1.17.2.4 commit? : revision 1.17.2.4 : date: 2002/06/24 05:10:41; author: dillon; state: Exp; lines: +26 -56 : MFC 1.30. Check only the fields we know should be the same between the : primary and alternate superblocks, so fsck doesn't barf on new features : added to UFS in later releases. : : Submitted by: mckusick Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sunbay Software AG, [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age msg48223/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?
:.. :=20 : I've discussed this issue with Poul-Henning Kamp. You need fsck : from at least 4.7. :=20 :... (Ruslan Ermilov writes): :Is this handled by fsck/setup.c,v 1.17.2.4 commit? Yes, I believe so. -Matt Matthew Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] :: revision 1.17.2.4 :: date: 2002/06/24 05:10:41; author: dillon; state: Exp; lines: +26 -56 :: MFC 1.30. Check only the fields we know should be the same between the :: primary and alternate superblocks, so fsck doesn't barf on new features :: added to UFS in later releases. ::=20 :: Submitted by:mckusick : : :Cheers, :--=20 :Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, :... To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:06:03 +0200
From: Ruslan Ermilov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Petr Holub [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matt Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: UFS1 created by 5.0 is incompatible with 4.0's?
X-ASK-Info: Whitelist match
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 01:59:11PM +0100, Petr Holub wrote:
Hi,
=20
While testing the 4.0 - 5.0 upgrade path, I've created (under
5.0) a UFS1 partition and installed 4.0 onto it. After booting
the 4.0 from it, kernel complained about ``numdirs is zero, try
using an alternate superblock'' for / partition -- I've tried
what it suggests (by fsck -b 32, etc.) but the result was always
the same -- the file system was marked dirty and only read-only
usable. After rebooting in 5.0, this file system was similarly
unusable. Is this a bug or a feature?
=20
I've discussed this issue with Poul-Henning Kamp. You need fsck
from at least 4.7.
=20
Is this handled by fsck/setup.c,v 1.17.2.4 commit?
: revision 1.17.2.4
: date: 2002/06/24 05:10:41; author: dillon; state: Exp; lines: +26 -56
: MFC 1.30. Check only the fields we know should be the same between the
: primary and alternate superblocks, so fsck doesn't barf on new features
: added to UFS in later releases.
:=20
: Submitted by: mckusick
Cheers,
--=20
Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sunbay Software AG,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251Simferopol, Ukraine
http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age
If the 1.17.2.4 commit does not solve your problem, try the following
patch that I made to the 5.0 fsck. If it solves your problem, then it
should probably be MFC'ed.
Kirk McKusick
Index: sbin/fsck_ffs/setup.c
===
RCS file: /usr/ncvs/src/sbin/fsck_ffs/setup.c,v
retrieving revision 1.41
diff -c -r1.41 setup.c
*** setup.c 2002/11/27 02:18:57 1.41
--- setup.c 2002/12/04 23:13:18
***
*** 258,269
(unsigned)(sizeof(struct inostatlist) * (sblock.fs_ncg)));
goto badsb;
}
! numdirs = sblock.fs_cstotal.cs_ndir;
dirhash = numdirs;
- if (numdirs == 0) {
- printf(numdirs is zero, try using an alternate superblock\n);
- goto badsb;
- }
inplast = 0;
listmax = numdirs + 10;
inpsort = (struct inoinfo **)calloc((unsigned)listmax,
--- 258,265
(unsigned)(sizeof(struct inostatlist) * (sblock.fs_ncg)));
goto badsb;
}
! numdirs = MAX(sblock.fs_cstotal.cs_ndir, 128);
dirhash = numdirs;
inplast = 0;
listmax = numdirs + 10;
inpsort = (struct inoinfo **)calloc((unsigned)listmax,
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
