Hi Daniel,
On 03/27/2017 09:37 AM, Daniel Schultz wrote:
I have sent fixes for the same problem on Monday.
These include a fix of the wrong return code after optimizations (now it
returns 0) and an fsck execution after the creation of EXT partitions.
The patch which is identical to yours
Hi Enrico,
Am 24.03.2017 um 15:01 schrieb Enrico Joerns:
Hi Daniel,
On 03/24/2017 02:34 PM, Daniel Schultz wrote:
Hi Enrico,
I have sent fixes for the same problem on Monday.
These include a fix of the wrong return code after optimizations (now it
returns 0) and an fsck execution after the
On 24 March 2017 at 14:01, Enrico Joerns wrote:
> But, there is another difference between our patches. We use `-pvfD`,
> while you use `-fy` as an fsck.extN option.
>
Indeed, I've selected your patch for my staging branch.
Cheers,
Ross
--
Hi Daniel,
On 03/24/2017 02:34 PM, Daniel Schultz wrote:
Hi Enrico,
I have sent fixes for the same problem on Monday.
These include a fix of the wrong return code after optimizations (now it
returns 0) and an fsck execution after the creation of EXT partitions.
The patch which is identical to
On 24 March 2017 at 13:34, Daniel Schultz wrote:
> The patch which is identical to yours wasn't applied so far, the other
> ones were.
>
Whoops, that was marked locally as merged but wasn't in the tree. Now it's
staged.
Ross
--
Hi Enrico,
I have sent fixes for the same problem on Monday.
These include a fix of the wrong return code after optimizations (now it
returns 0) and an fsck execution after the creation of EXT partitions.
The patch which is identical to yours wasn't applied so far, the other
ones were.
--
When performing a file system check, the image created with mkfs will
trigger Pass 3A ('Optimizing directories') which turns the file system
into state "changed" (EXT2_FLAG_CHANGED).
This will let fsck request a reboot by setting the return code flag "2".
The result of this is that each