Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

Duncan, you was right. The commit didn't happen and nothing was deleted except ext4 /boot. the System booted normally after GRUB2 and kernel recovery. Thank you much. P.S. I'm sorry for the late answer. 2016-08-09 23:30 GMT+03:00 Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net>: > Chris Murphy posted on Tue, 09

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016, Russell Coker wrote: > There are a variety of ways of giving the same result that rm > doesn't reject. "/*" Wasn't caught last time I checked. See the above > URL if you want to test out various rm operations as root. ;) Oh, yes - "rm -r /*" would work, even with a current

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

http://selinux.coker.com.au/play.html There are a variety of ways of giving the same result that rm doesn't reject. "/*" Wasn't caught last time I checked. See the above URL if you want to test out various rm operations as root. ;) On 10 August 2016 9:24:23 AM AEST, Christian Kujau

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

On Mon, 8 Aug 2016, Ivan Sizov wrote: > I'd ran "rm -rf //" by mistake two days ago. I'd stopped it after five Out of curiosity, what version of coreutils is this? The --preserve-root option is the default for quite some time now: > Don't include dirname.h, since system.h does it now. > (usage,

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

Chris Murphy posted on Tue, 09 Aug 2016 11:10:08 -0600 as excerpted: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Ivan Sizov wrote: >> 2016-08-08 20:13 GMT+03:00 Chris Murphy : >>> Just a wild guess, the deletions may be in the tree log and haven't >>> been

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Ivan Sizov wrote: > 2016-08-08 20:13 GMT+03:00 Chris Murphy : >> Just a wild guess, the deletions may be in the tree log and haven't >> been applied to the other trees (fs tree, extent tree, etc). So yes >> I'd expect

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

Ivan Sizov posted on Mon, 08 Aug 2016 19:30:16 +0300 as excerpted: > I'd ran "rm -rf //" by mistake two days ago. I'd stopped it after five > seconds, but some files had been deleted. I'd tried to shutdown the > system, but couldn't (a lot of files in /bin had been deleted and > systemd didn't

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

2016-08-08 21:52 GMT+03:00 Hugo Mills : > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 09:38:28PM +0300, Ivan Sizov wrote: >> P.S. IMHO, log replay by default is a quite dangerous thing. I didn't >> know about that change and I could lose all files if the live USB had >> 4.6 kernel)) > >Log

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 09:38:28PM +0300, Ivan Sizov wrote: > 2016-08-08 20:13 GMT+03:00 Chris Murphy : > > Just a wild guess, the deletions may be in the tree log and haven't > > been applied to the other trees (fs tree, extent tree, etc). So yes > > I'd expect they get

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

2016-08-08 20:13 GMT+03:00 Chris Murphy : > Just a wild guess, the deletions may be in the tree log and haven't > been applied to the other trees (fs tree, extent tree, etc). So yes > I'd expect they get deleted on a rw mount. > > This is what kernel? Because kernel 4.6

Re: Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Ivan Sizov wrote: > I'd ran "rm -rf //" by mistake two days ago. I'd stopped it after five > seconds, but some files had been deleted. I'd tried to shutdown the > system, but couldn't (a lot of files in /bin had been deleted and > systemd

Strange behavior after "rm -rf //"

I'd ran "rm -rf //" by mistake two days ago. I'd stopped it after five seconds, but some files had been deleted. I'd tried to shutdown the system, but couldn't (a lot of files in /bin had been deleted and systemd didn't work). After hard reboot (by reset button) and booting to a live USB a strange