On Mon, 11.02.13 09:46, Karel Zak (k...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 12:38:55AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > > diff --git a/src/fsck/fsck.c b/src/fsck/fsck.c
> > > index 058f34d..b1938c7 100644
> > > --- a/src/fsck/fsck.c
> > > +++ b/src/fsck/fsck.c
> > > @@ -321,9 +321,10 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
> > > }
> > >
> > > cmdline[i++] = "/sbin/fsck";
> > > - cmdline[i++] = "-a";
> > > +// cmdline[i++] = "-a";
> > > cmdline[i++] = "-T";
> > > cmdline[i++] = "-l";
> > > + cmdline[i++] = "-y";
> > >
> >
> > Hmm, I wonder if -a or -y is the way to go. Karel, as util-linux/fsck
> > maintainer, do you have an opinion whether we should use -a or -y for
> > automatic, non-interactive fscking? Is -a obsolete and -y the future?
>
> This is gray zone... there is not explicit standard or conclusion
> that -a (or -p) or -y is supported by all fsck.<type> checkers.
>
> Anyway, it seems that -a is supported on more places.
Do you happen to know whether -a and -y are equivalent in the more
common fsck implementations, modulo the RTC issue this thread was
initially about?
If they are equivalent, then I think we should probably stick to -a.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
