[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#47490: base: mke2fs makes unmountable filesystems; mount doesn't honor -o nocheck



> Delivery-Date: Sun Oct 17 14:28:26 1999
> X-Envelope-To: <jimd@starshine.org>
> X-Envelope-From: apharris@burrito.onshore.com
> To: Jim Dennis <jimd@starshine.org>
> Cc: 47490@bugs.debian.org, control@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#47490: base: mke2fs makes unmountable filesystems; mount doesn't honor -o nocheck
> From: Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com>
> Date: 15 Oct 1999 18:48:35 -0400
> In-Reply-To: Jim Dennis's message of "Fri, 15 Oct 1999 03:49:10 -0700"
> Message-ID: <oag0zc8cl8.fsf@burrito.onshore.com>
> User-Agent: Gnus/5.070096 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.96) Emacs/20.3
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> 
> 
> reassign 47490 boot-floppies
> thanks
> 
> Jim Dennis <jimd@starshine.org> writes:
> > 	I was wrong.  Earlier I claimed that mount was
> > 	unable to handle a filesystem with a non-default
> > 	inode/block ratio ("couldn't mount RDWR").  However,
> > 	my reasoning was wrong.
> > 
> > 	In actuality the new mke2fs is making filesystems that
> > 	the latest mount command will not tolerate.  
> > 	
> > 	I've heard that we need to start using the 
> > 	mount -o nocheck (or check=none) option to mount the 
> > 	newly created filesystems with the "sparse superblock" 
> > 	features.  
> > 	
> > 	However, that option is not honored with my copy of 
> > 	mount (2.9x).  mke2fs version is 1.15.  
> > 
> > 	e2fsprogs version 1.15-3
> 
> Huh -- I assume you're using the new 2.2.0 (potato) boot-floppies from
> Incoming?

	Not a valid assumption.  I'm using the 2.0.36 kernel
	that shipped with slink.  I'll upgade to 2.2.13 when 
	it becomes available and I'm convinced that it really 
	is stable.  'til then I'll probably go for a 2.0.38.

	(I can tolerate a few flaky things in userspace
	a.k.a. potato/unstable Debian.  However, I'll wait for 
	a stable kernel).
 
--
Jim Dennis                                             jdennis@linuxcare.com
Linuxcare: Linux Corporate Support Team:            http://www.linuxcare.com


Reply to: