Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:33:41 -0700 From: =?utf-8?Q?Derek_Kuli=C5=84ski?= <takeda@takeda.tk> To: Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Clint Olsen <clint.olsen@gmail.com> Subject: Re: UNEXPECTED SOFT UPDATE INCONSISTENCY; RUN fsck MANUALLY Message-ID: <249873145.20080926213341@takeda.tk> In-Reply-To: <20080921220720.GA9847@icarus.home.lan> References: <20080921213426.GA13923@0lsen.net> <20080921215203.GC9494@icarus.home.lan> <20080921215930.GA25826@0lsen.net> <20080921220720.GA9847@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Jeremy, Sunday, September 21, 2008, 3:07:20 PM, you wrote: > Consider using background_fsck="no" in /etc/rc.conf if you prefer the > old behaviour. Otherwise, boot single-user then do the fsck. Actually what's the advantage of having fsck run in background if it isn't capable of fixing things? Isn't it more dangerous to be it like that? i.e. administrator might not notice the problem; also filesystem could break even further... -- Best regards, Derek mailto:takeda@takeda.tk I tried to daydream, but my mind kept wandering.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?249873145.20080926213341>