On 20 Apr 2005 at 22h04, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
> > for some reason yet unknown, fsck.hfsplus doesn't correctly set the
> > HFSPLUS_VOL_UNMNT flag here.
>
> If fsck doesn't mark it clean, there must be a reason
By the way, the reason is that this stupid utility opens the device
read-only
On 20 Apr 2005 at 22h04, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Colin Leroy wrote:
>
> > for some reason yet unknown, fsck.hfsplus doesn't correctly set the
> > HFSPLUS_VOL_UNMNT flag here.
>
> If fsck doesn't mark it clean, there must be a reason and that also
> means you
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Colin Leroy wrote:
> for some reason yet unknown, fsck.hfsplus doesn't correctly set the
> HFSPLUS_VOL_UNMNT flag here.
If fsck doesn't mark it clean, there must be a reason and that also means
you shouldn't mount it writable.
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Colin Leroy wrote:
for some reason yet unknown, fsck.hfsplus doesn't correctly set the
HFSPLUS_VOL_UNMNT flag here.
If fsck doesn't mark it clean, there must be a reason and that also means
you shouldn't mount it writable.
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this
On 20 Apr 2005 at 22h04, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Colin Leroy wrote:
for some reason yet unknown, fsck.hfsplus doesn't correctly set the
HFSPLUS_VOL_UNMNT flag here.
If fsck doesn't mark it clean, there must be a reason and that also
means you shouldn't
On 20 Apr 2005 at 22h04, Roman Zippel wrote:
Hi,
for some reason yet unknown, fsck.hfsplus doesn't correctly set the
HFSPLUS_VOL_UNMNT flag here.
If fsck doesn't mark it clean, there must be a reason
By the way, the reason is that this stupid utility opens the device
read-only (hence it
6 matches
Mail list logo