Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 00:53:16 +0600 From: Max Khon <fjoe@iclub.nsu.ru> To: Jan Srzednicki <winfried@student.agh.edu.pl> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: background fsck did not create lost+found Message-ID: <20030123005315.A97248@iclub.nsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0301221916470.22474-100000@student.uci.agh.edu.pl>; from winfried@student.agh.edu.pl on Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 07:18:44PM %2B0100 References: <200301221813.h0MIDUTF040121@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <Pine.GSO.4.44.0301221916470.22474-100000@student.uci.agh.edu.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
hi, there! On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 07:18:44PM +0100, Jan Srzednicki wrote: > > > Would that be a big problem to allow some fsck option not to erase all > > > these softupdates-pending inodes, but to put them in lost+found as usual? > > > > It certainly couldn't be done with the background fsck, because > > background fsck works on a snapshot and not the running filesystem; > > thus, it cannot make any allocations -- it can only deallocate things. > > Still, in case you know some of your important files can be lost, you can > boot the system to single user and run foreground fsck. this is not an option if the system was rebooted because of power loss or kernel panic /fjoe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030123005315.A97248>