On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:02:16 + (UTC), jb wrote:
> Robert Bonomi mail.r-bonomi.com> writes:
>
> > ...
> > The fsck_ffs manpage says that 'lost+found' is _created_ *when*needed*,
> > in the root of a filesystem, if not already present.
> >
>
Robert Bonomi mail.r-bonomi.com> writes:
> ...
> The fsck_ffs manpage says that 'lost+found' is _created_ *when*needed*,
> in the root of a filesystem, if not already present.
>
> The presense of /mnt/lost+found is _not_ an error. just a surperfluous
> fi
jb wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Each fs should have its own lost+found directory.
> It is used by fsck for placing recovered corrupted fs files in there.
> This implies the dir must have already existed (it may not be mounted ad hoc
> e.g. at boot time, during fs recovery).
>
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:58:09 + (UTC), jb wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Each fs should have its own lost+found directory.
> It is used by fsck for placing recovered corrupted fs files in there.
Correct.
> This implies the dir must have already existed (it may not be mounted ad hoc
>
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 2:58 AM, jb wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Each fs should have its own lost+found directory.
> It is used by fsck for placing recovered corrupted fs files in there.
> This implies the dir must have already existed (it may not be mounted ad
> hoc
> e.g. at boot tim
Hi,
Each fs should have its own lost+found directory.
It is used by fsck for placing recovered corrupted fs files in there.
This implies the dir must have already existed (it may not be mounted ad hoc
e.g. at boot time, during fs recovery).
In FreeBSD 9, I found lost+found dir under /mnt.
This
On Mon, 4 May 2009 11:08:04 +0200, Ruben de Groot wrote:
> Probably because the # is interpreted as comment. I can reproduce this
> in a bourne shell; not in (t)csh.
Ah, thank you. According to the prompt, it didn't look
like csh in the first place, but not like plain sh, too.
Customized bash pro
5:45:13 -0400, PJ wrote:
> > > [~]# cd /tmp/lost+found/#123456
> > > [/tmp/lost+found/#123456]# ls
> >
> > Okay, it's empty.
> >
> >
> >
> > > [/tmp/lost+found/#123456]# cd ..
> >
> > Strange, why does .. lead you from /t
On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 11:06:27PM +0200, Polytropon typed:
> On Sat, 02 May 2009 15:45:13 -0400, PJ wrote:
> > [~]# cd /tmp/lost+found/#123456
> > [/tmp/lost+found/#123456]# ls
>
> Okay, it's empty.
>
>
>
> > [/tmp/lost+found/#123456]# cd ..
>
&g
On Sat, 02 May 2009 15:45:13 -0400, PJ wrote:
> [~]# cd /tmp/lost+found/#123456
> [/tmp/lost+found/#123456]# ls
Okay, it's empty.
> [/tmp/lost+found/#123456]# cd ..
Strange, why does .. lead you from /tmp/lost+found/#123456
to /tmp/lost+found/#123456, just as if cd w
A couple of days ago I had minor glitch as my FreeBSD box on my local
intranet had an unexpected shutdown.
When I fsck'd on reboot I was left with a few lost+found directories
with #99 files. Most appeared inconsequential and could be deleted.
But there is one /tmp/lost+found that puzzl
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 08:30:40PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:21:28 +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
> > 2009/4/16 Bruce Cran :
> > > Maybe we should tell FreeBSD to stop shouting too? :)
> >
> > Actually, we really should! Come on, we're not on teletypes any more.
>
> Did UPPERC
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:21:28 +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
> 2009/4/16 Bruce Cran :
> > Maybe we should tell FreeBSD to stop shouting too? :)
>
> Actually, we really should! Come on, we're not on teletypes any more.
Did UPPERCASE LETTERS make the teletype print louder?
I always assumed they would jus
2009/4/16 Bruce Cran :
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:03:58 +0100
> Chris Rees wrote:
>
> 2009/4/16 vijay kumar :
>>>
>>> SORRY. NO SPACE IN lost+found DIRECTORY
>
>> Please don't shout.
>
> fsfsck_ffs/dir.c:467: pfatal("SORRY. NO SP
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 14:03:58 +0100
Chris Rees wrote:
2009/4/16 vijay kumar :
>>
>> SORRY. NO SPACE IN lost+found DIRECTORY
> Please don't shout.
fsfsck_ffs/dir.c:467: pfatal("SORRY. NO SPACE IN
lost+found DIRECTORY"
Maybe we should tell FreeBSD to st
Pasted from subject:
2009/4/16 vijay kumar :
>
> SORRY. NO SPACE IN lost+found DIRECTORY
Please don't shout.
Have you checked that / has sufficient space?
Try
root # fsck /
---
root # df -h
and post the result.
Regards,
Chris
--
A: Because it messes up the order in w
Sorry, no contents in email.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
ran 'fsck -t ufs -y'. all seemed fine and dandy until I tried to remount the
volume after bringing it back to multi-user mode. The disk space was occupied,
but it all resided in lost+found with names like : #001 , #002
etc... !! Each file was multiple gigabytes wor
Yesterday my server rebooted for some unknown reason and after fsck-
ing 4 times I had ALOT of stuff in lost+found. I really need to try
and review/recover these files. Only docs I've found were linux
centric, and focused on directories and dates. I can't make out
either here
Bill Moran writes:
> > What is lost+found? I've got one on all my filesystems and
> > over the past few days i've had things being deleted from
> > there. Do i have a problem?
>
> When fsck finds problems with the filesystem, it saves any data
>
In response to "Dave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello,
> What is lost+found? I've got one on all my filesystems and over the past
> few days i've had things being deleted from there. Do i have a problem?
When fsck finds problems with the filesystem, it sav
Hello,
What is lost+found? I've got one on all my filesystems and over the past
few days i've had things being deleted from there. Do i have a problem?
Thanks.
Dave.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.o
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Aug 02), Scott Oertel said:
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Aug 02), Scott Oertel said:
Yesterday after an fsck a file was placed in the lost+found folder
which size was exactly the size of the drive (450gb). What is the
safest way
In the last episode (Aug 02), Scott Oertel said:
> Dan Nelson wrote:
> >In the last episode (Aug 02), Scott Oertel said:
> >>Yesterday after an fsck a file was placed in the lost+found folder
> >>which size was exactly the size of the drive (450gb). What is the
> &g
Dan Nelson wrote:
In the last episode (Aug 02), Scott Oertel said:
Yesterday after an fsck a file was placed in the lost+found folder which
size was exactly the size of the drive (450gb). What is the safest way
to remove this file?
If its timestamp updates when you touch a file on
In the last episode (Aug 02), Scott Oertel said:
> Yesterday after an fsck a file was placed in the lost+found folder which
> size was exactly the size of the drive (450gb). What is the safest way
> to remove this file?
If its timestamp updates when you touch a file on the main filesys
Yesterday after an fsck a file was placed in the lost+found folder which
size was exactly the size of the drive (450gb). What is the safest way
to remove this file?
Thanks,
Scott Oertel
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
Hello Chuck,
> Jerlique Bahn wrote:
> > If I pull the power on my server whilst its doing heavy IO, should I get
> > files in lost+found if my raid card has battery backed cache?
>
> Yes, it's still possible.
>
> The cache on the RAID card will be flushed OK, bu
Jerlique Bahn wrote:
If I pull the power on my server whilst its doing heavy IO, should I get
files in lost+found if my raid card has battery backed cache?
Yes, it's still possible.
I was under the understanding that the file operations were atomic, and
hence freebsd's file sys
Hello,
If I pull the power on my server whilst its doing heavy IO, should I get
files in lost+found if my raid card has battery backed cache?
I was under the understanding that the file operations were atomic, and
hence freebsd's file system should have no corrupted files on the reboot
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 11:42:54PM +0200, Jose Luis Alarcon Sanchez wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Why the structure of directories in FreeBSD don't have a lost+found
> directory?. (Talking about 6.x Releases)
>
> Some Unix manuals tell that this directory is very important for the
>
Hi.
Why the structure of directories in FreeBSD don't have a lost+found
directory?. (Talking about 6.x Releases)
Some Unix manuals tell that this directory is very important for the
work of the fsck program...
Thanks very much, in advance.
Regards.
Jose.
--
http://www.lordofunix.org/
While trying to recover from a HD crash, 'fsck -y /dev/rad1s1a' reports
the following error a number of times at the end of it's run:
UNREF FILE I=3537799 OWNER=500 MODE=100644
SIZE=6611 MTIME=Oct 25 21:12 2003
RECONNECT? yes
SORRY. NO SPACE IN lost+found DIRECTORY
This tells m
While trying to recover from a HD crash, 'fsck -y /dev/rad1s1a' reports
the following error a number of times at the end of it's run.
UNREF FILE I=3537799 OWNER=500 MODE=100644
SIZE=6611 MTIME=Oct 25 21:12 2003
RECONNECT? yes
SORRY. NO SPACE IN lost+found DIRECTORY
This tells m
gt; > > > > >
> > > > > > > Tried that, didn't work...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [4:00pm][/mnt/usr/lost+found] >> rm -rf *
> > > > > > > rm: #5558272: Directory not empty
> > > > &
gt; You seem to have additional filesystem corruption here.
> > > >
> > > > I did fsck with the -fy flag just now and this is what it says:
> > > >
> > > > UNREF DIR I=471104 OWNER=root MODE=40755
> > > > SIZE=512 MTIME=Mar 1 04:00 2004
>
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 04:03:35PM -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
> > > > > > They're just directories, remove them in the usual way.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tried that, didn't work...
> > > >
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTE
x27;re just directories, remove them in the usual way.
> > > >
> > > > Tried that, didn't work...
> > >
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [4:00pm][/mnt/usr/lost+found] >> rm -rf *
> > > > rm: #5558272: Directory not empty
> > >
t; > Tried that, didn't work...
> >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [4:00pm][/mnt/usr/lost+found] >> rm -rf *
> > > rm: #5558272: Directory not empty
> > > rm: #7018496: Directory not empty
> > > rm: #7206914: Directory not empty
> > > rm
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 02:00:12PM -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
>
> > > They're just directories, remove them in the usual way.
> >
> > Tried that, didn't work...
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [4:00pm][/mn
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 02:00:12PM -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
> > They're just directories, remove them in the usual way.
>
> Tried that, didn't work...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [4:00pm][/mnt/usr/lost+found] >> rm -rf *
> rm: #5558272: Directory not empty
&
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 08:27:11AM -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
> > Hi everyone:
> >
> > On one of my disks that has no files in it mounted as /mnt/usr,
> > fsck is creating the lost+found directory and underneath each on
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 08:27:11AM -1000, Vincent Poy wrote:
> Hi everyone:
>
> On one of my disks that has no files in it mounted as /mnt/usr,
> fsck is creating the lost+found directory and underneath each one are
> directories named starting with # that is empty, is
Hi everyone:
On one of my disks that has no files in it mounted as /mnt/usr,
fsck is creating the lost+found directory and underneath each one are
directories named starting with # that is empty, is there anyway to remove
these? Thanks.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [10:26am][/mnt/usr/lost+found
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 12:10:33PM +0200, Doron Shmaryahu wrote:
> I had a server which due to power problems rebooted a couple of times. I did
> a fsck, because it kept complaining about inconsistencies.
> Now some directories seem to have moved. I located them in lost + found. Is
&g
Hi,
I had a server which due to power problems rebooted a couple of times. I did
a fsck, because it kept complaining about inconsistencies.
Now some directories seem to have moved. I located them in lost + found. Is
there any way to recover these files from there ??
thanks
Doron
To
47 matches
Mail list logo
