Re: vinum fsck wrappers strangeness
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 commented the line out during the reboot process. After bringing the new system online, I executed: /sbin/fsck -y /dev/vinum/raid5 and received the following error: fsck: exec /usr/sbin/fsck_unused for /dev/vinum/raid5: No such file or directory OK. That means that the disklabel checks are failing for type 'vinum'. I'll take a look at this. What you should be doing is running fsck with a type, ie fsck -t ufs /dev/vinum/raid5 So, it appears that fsck is attempting to determine a file system type, tries to use /etc/fstab, and then falls back to a secondary scheme. In the secondary scheme, ufs is what we want, but vinum is what we're getting. If anyone has any information about this please let me know. I'll try to look into it tomorrow. I'll try fix the autodetect for vinum partition types (if its possible, I seem to remember there being a vinum type in the header files). Its weird though, I would have thought a vinum device would be type FSTYPE (eg BSD4.3) rather than VINUM, which I'd associate with the underlying devices .. Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"Programming is like sex: [EMAIL PROTECTED] One mistake and you have to support for a lifetime." -- rec.humor.funny To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
vinum fsck wrappers strangeness
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 bringing the new system online, I executed: /sbin/fsck -y /dev/vinum/raid5 and received the following error: fsck: exec /usr/sbin/fsck_unused for /dev/vinum/raid5: No such file or directory Knowing that I've been able to fsck this volume in the past I checked for a vinum specific fsck binary. Nothing there. It then occurred to me it's a ufs volume, and I've always fsck'd it by mount point. I then uncommented the line in /etc/fstab and executed: /sbin/fsck -y /pub and it worked correctly. After the above (with the /etc/fstab line uncommented), I re-executed:o /sbin/fsck -y /dev/vinum/raid5 and it worked correctly. So, it appears that fsck is attempting to determine a file system type, tries to use /etc/fstab, and then falls back to a secondary scheme. In the secondary scheme, ufs is what we want, but vinum is what we're getting. If anyone has any information about this please let me know. I'll try to look into it tomorrow. Thanks, John To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: vinum fsck wrappers strangeness
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 the line out during the reboot process. After bringing the new system online, I executed: /sbin/fsck -y /dev/vinum/raid5 and received the following error: fsck: exec /usr/sbin/fsck_unused for /dev/vinum/raid5: No such file or directory I saw a related problem with mfs. I had the following lines in /etc/fstab: --- #/dev/ad0s4 noneswapsw /dev/ad0s4 /tmpmfs rw,-s65536,-i8192,noatime,noauto --- The mfs line has very little to do with /dev/ad0s4 or swap. The label for /dev/ad0s4 just provides a (bogus) geometry for mfs. I wasn't using /dev/ad0s4 for either swap or mfs, but it happened to have a filesystem on it, and when I tried to fsck this, fsck attempted to exec the nonexistent file fsck_mfs. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
HEADS UP: fsck wrappers gotcha
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. This forces fsck to NOT consider the FS for fsck-on-boot, and should make things quieter. Note that swap / procfs in /etc/fstab already use dump/pass = 0, but this is just to make sure. Just FYI, Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
fsck wrappers, commit candidate
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 namespace collisions. Yes, as bp mentioned to me before, so I'm thinking about passing the fsname through a tolower() and a s/ /_/g before using it as a filename. Any problems with this? Ok, I've since done this and I've updated the tarball again at http://people.freebsd.org/~adrian/fsck/ . This is the version which I would like to commit, so I'd like some feedback beforehand. Thanks! Adrian -- Adrian Chadd "The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 strcat("/sbin/fsck_", fstypename)
to see if fsck is supported on filesystems of type fstypename.
You don't try to auto-detect and fsck a mounted FS. If its mounted and you
are doing it during bootup, it'll generally be in fstab which the current
wrapper code looks in.
So, the question is: how do you take the raw disk device and figure out which
FS type it is, and then which fsck program to run?
Adrian
--
Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls
live." -- Random IRC quote
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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, "partition `%s' is not of a legal vfstype",
str);
- if ((vfstype = dktypenames[t]) == NULL)
+ if ((vfstype = fstypenames[t]) == NULL)
errx(1, "vfstype `%s' on partition `%s' is not supported",
fstypenames[t], str);
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.
fs typenames are already strings in FreeBSD (the kernel's vfc_index is an
implementation detail which should not be visible in applications).
Oh, wait. I understand what you're talking about now. There isn't any mapping
to partition type (p_fstype) to fs typename string.
http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/syssrc/sys/sys/disklabel.h.diff?r1=1.60r2=1.61
What do people think about doing this as well? It would certainly make things
a little tidier, but every time a new fs comes in the magic autodetection code
will need to be updated (if appropriate, of course.)
This would be a bug.
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 strcat("/sbin/fsck_", fstypename)
to see if fsck is supported on filesystems of type fstypename.
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 collisions. Yes, as bp mentioned to me before, so I'm thinking about passing the fsname through a tolower() and a s/ /_/g before using it as a filename. Any problems with this? This shouldn't be necessary. All fstypenames for currently supported filesystems are in lower case with no underscores, and new ones should follow this convention. Spaces in the names would probably break /etc/fstab. Fstypenames for currently supported filesystems as found by grepping for VFS_SET in /sys: cd9660 coda devfs ext2fs fdesc hpfs kernfs linprocfs mfs msdos nfs ntfs ntfs nullfs nwfs portal procfs ufs umap union Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 creating a new list 'mountnames[]', which maps the fs type to a string. Probably a hard link to fsck_ffs will do the job fine and makes it clear to see which fs'es are supported: # ls -ail fsck* 6338 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 66032 22 sen 16:24 fsck 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_4.2BSD 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ffs 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ufs 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 collisions. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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", str); - if ((vfstype = dktypenames[t]) == NULL) + if ((vfstype = fstypenames[t]) == NULL) errx(1, "vfstype `%s' on partition `%s' is not supported", fstypenames[t], str); 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. fs typenames are already strings in FreeBSD (the kernel's vfc_index is an implementation detail which should not be visible in applications). Oh, wait. I understand what you're talking about now. There isn't any mapping to partition type (p_fstype) to fs typename string. http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/syssrc/sys/sys/disklabel.h.diff?r1=1.60r2=1.61 What do people think about doing this as well? It would certainly make things a little tidier, but every time a new fs comes in the magic autodetection code will need to be updated (if appropriate, of course.) This would be a bug. Well, if you have any suggestions, I'm all for it. :-) Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 is that a single wrapper program spawns a FS-specific fsck process a la mount and mount_*, making multiple-FS support a lot easier. (Think about having fsck_ext2fs, fsck_msdos and fsck_ffs doing your FSes on bootup..) They can be found at http://www.freebsd.org/~adrian/fsck/ . PLEASE read the README before you use them, as there are a few gotchas. Thanks to some feedback from bp, I found a stupid mistake in my porting. 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 = dktypenames[t]) == NULL) + if ((vfstype = fstypenames[t]) == NULL) errx(1, "vfstype `%s' on partition `%s' is not supported", fstypenames[t], str); 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. http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/syssrc/sys/sys/disklabel.h.diff?r1=1.60r2=1.61 What do people think about doing this as well? It would certainly make things a little tidier, but every time a new fs comes in the magic autodetection code will need to be updated (if appropriate, of course.) Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 link to fsck_ffs will do the job fine and makes it clear to see which fs'es are supported: # ls -ail fsck* 6338 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 66032 22 ÓÅÎ 16:24 fsck 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 ÓÅÎ 15:41 fsck_4.2BSD 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 ÓÅÎ 15:41 fsck_ffs 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 ÓÅÎ 15:41 fsck_ufs -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 type to a string. Probably a hard link to fsck_ffs will do the job fine and makes it clear to see which fs'es are supported: # ls -ail fsck* 6338 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 66032 22 sen 16:24 fsck 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_4.2BSD 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ffs 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ufs The trouble is that some of the FS strings have spaces in their filenames. This might confuse a few people. Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 is that a single wrapper program spawns a FS-specific fsck process a la mount and mount_*, making multiple-FS support a lot easier. (Think about having fsck_ext2fs, fsck_msdos and fsck_ffs doing your FSes on bootup..) They can be found at http://www.freebsd.org/~adrian/fsck/ . PLEASE read the README before you use them, as there are a few gotchas. .. and I've just redone them again, with more bp comments. I've killed fsck_ffs/preen.c and moved the only function the fsck_ffs code now uses to a new util.c . This makes fsck_ffs a tiny bit smaller, and pretty much stomps on the shared code problem. Anyone else up for testing ? Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 creating a new list 'mountnames[]', which maps the fs type to a string. Probably a hard link to fsck_ffs will do the job fine and makes it clear to see which fs'es are supported: # ls -ail fsck* 6338 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 66032 22 sen 16:24 fsck 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_4.2BSD 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ffs 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ufs The trouble is that some of the FS strings have spaces in their filenames. This might confuse a few people. These (and probably other confusing) characters can be replaced with underscores without much harm. -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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, vinum, ISO9660, etc. NetBSD fixed this by creating a new list 'mountnames[]', which maps the fs type to a string. Probably a hard link to fsck_ffs will do the job fine and makes it clear to see which fs'es are supported: # ls -ail fsck* 6338 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 66032 22 sen 16:24 fsck 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_4.2BSD 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ffs 6334 -r-xr-xr-x 3 root wheel 290896 22 sen 15:41 fsck_ufs The trouble is that some of the FS strings have spaces in their filenames. This might confuse a few people. These (and probably other confusing) characters can be replaced with underscores without much harm. That shouldn't be that hard to do. What do others think? Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 = dktypenames[t]) == NULL) + if ((vfstype = fstypenames[t]) == NULL) errx(1, "vfstype `%s' on partition `%s' is not supported", fstypenames[t], str); 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. fs typenames are already strings in FreeBSD (the kernel's vfc_index is an implementation detail which should not be visible in applications). http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/syssrc/sys/sys/disklabel.h.diff?r1=1.60r2=1.61 What do people think about doing this as well? It would certainly make things a little tidier, but every time a new fs comes in the magic autodetection code will need to be updated (if appropriate, of course.) This would be a bug. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Fsck wrappers, revisited
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 process a la mount and mount_*, making multiple-FS support a lot easier. (Think about having fsck_ext2fs, fsck_msdos and fsck_ffs doing your FSes on bootup..) They can be found at http://www.freebsd.org/~adrian/fsck/ . PLEASE read the README before you use them, as there are a few gotchas. Thanks! Adrian -- Adrian Chadd"The main reason Santa is so jolly is [EMAIL PROTECTED] because he knows where all the bad girls live." -- Random IRC quote To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
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 ChaddBuild a man a fire, and he's warm for the [EMAIL PROTECTED]rest of the evening. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
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 legacy dates from long time ago; e.g. the log message in the kernel code which declares the ffs module (it reads: `` Call ffs ``ufs'' for the benefit of poor, confused user-land programs. '') dates to September '94. Are there any arguments against changing the filesystem type name to 'ffs' in the kernel and in the userland? If not, I'll volunteer to find all kernel/userland uses I can and provide a diff. The correct way to do this is to make it accept both for some limited time, and then warn about the obsolete for a few months, then discontinue it. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD coreteam member | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: 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 legacy dates from long time ago; e.g. the log message in the kernel code which declares the ffs module (it reads: `` Call ffs ``ufs'' for the benefit of poor, confused user-land programs. '') dates to September '94. Are there any arguments against changing the filesystem type name to 'ffs' in the kernel and in the userland? If not, I'll volunteer to find all kernel/userland uses I can and provide a diff. The correct way to do this is to make it accept both for some limited time, and then warn about the obsolete for a 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 to ffs. I would rather not have both happen right now, as doing ufs-ffs requires kernel changes and userland (mount) changes. Adrian -- Adrian ChaddBuild a man a fire, and he's warm for the [EMAIL PROTECTED]rest of the evening. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
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 ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts ** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups 1506 files, 57594 used, 10837 free (285 frags, 1319 blocks, 0.4% fragmentation) ** /dev/amrd0a ** /dev/ad0s1f ** Last Mounted on /cache ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes ** Last Mounted on /usr ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes ... Would people object to fsck printing out either the mountpoint or the devname (where appropriate) prepending each line of fsck_ffs ? Yes, if it is down for anything except the parallel (preen) case. How did you get all the above output? The current fsck doesn't print any "Phase" messages for the preen case. When these messages are printed, interactive input is required except in the -y case, so the processes can't be run in parallel. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
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 - Check Blocks and Sizes de0: enabling 10baseT port ** Phase 2 - Check Pathnames ** Phase 3 - Check Connectivity ** Phase 4 - Check Reference Counts ** Phase 5 - Check Cyl groups 1506 files, 57594 used, 10837 free (285 frags, 1319 blocks, 0.4% fragmentation) ** /dev/amrd0a ** /dev/ad0s1f ** Last Mounted on /cache ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes ** Last Mounted on /usr ** Phase 1 - Check Blocks and Sizes ... Would people object to fsck printing out either the mountpoint or the devname (where appropriate) prepending each line of fsck_ffs ? Yes, if it is down for anything except the parallel (preen) case. How did you get all the above output? The current fsck doesn't print any "Phase" messages for the preen case. When these messages are printed, interactive input is required except in the -y case, so the processes can't be run in parallel. A couple of oversights when I did the code merging. They've been fixed, and I'll throw up a new copy of the source code at the same URL in about an hour. Adrian -- Adrian ChaddBuild a man a fire, and he's warm for the [EMAIL PROTECTED]rest of the evening. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
fsck wrappers
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: http://www.freebsd.org/~adrian/fsck.tar.gz A couple of notes: * the rest of the system treats ffs filesystems as "ufs". Besides the fact that I dislike this, I decided against the NetBSD way of if (strcmp(vfstype, "ufs")) fstype = "ffs"; and have left people to symlink or hardlink fsck_ufs to fsck_ffs. * I've left the CVS directories intact so people can generate their own cvs diff's against the original sources. Appropriate CVSROOT frobbing will be needed. Constructive comments are welcome. Adrian To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
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 "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
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 helpers - adding new fsck types doesn't require modifying the startup scripts or fsck. Think of a system where you have an FFS fs, an LFS fs, and perhaps an IFS fs. Each one requires a seperate fsck, but it would be stupid to have fsck_* -p in the rc scripts. Eventually FreeBSD systems will have more than just FFS based filesystems running the system, and users will want to fsck them just like a FFS filesystem. adrian -- Adrian ChaddBuild a man a fire, and he's warm for the [EMAIL PROTECTED]rest of the evening. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: fsck wrappers
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 using the opportunity that the issue surfaced up. I think the wrapper is a great idea, and reporting the mountpoint etc., asked about in a separate message, is great as well. -- Anatoly Vorobey, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pobox.com/~mellon/ "Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
