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

Bug#249199: marked as done (Flag usrquota/grpquota should check for quota support)

Your message dated Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:19:17 +0200
with message-id <796aed870803200819w7ac2fb9fudce2f8a60f7d1f78@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Quota support for 'reiserfs' is enabled by default.
has caused the Debian Bug report #249199,
regarding Flag usrquota/grpquota should check for quota support
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org

249199: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=249199
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: partman-reiserfs
Version: 20040515

Flagging a reiserfs filesystem as usrquota/grpquota causes mount to fail
if the kernel doesn't have reiserfs quota support, which the
2.6-kernel in the new Debian Installer doesn't have (version 2.6.5-1).
This problem does probably exist for other filesystems too. Checking for
quota support for the filesystem type might be an idea.

# uname -r
# mount /dev/md2 /home -t reiserfs
# umount /home
# mount /dev/md2 /home -t reiserfs -o usrquota,grpquota
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md2,
       or too many mounted file systems

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I've tested and the mounting with "usrquota,grpquota" works for reiserfs now:

$ mount
/dev/sda9 on /opt type reiserfs (rw,noatime)

mteodor@inspire:~$ sudo -H mount -t reiserfs -o
remount,noatime,usrquota,grpquota /dev/sda9 /opt
mteodor@inspire:~$ mount
/dev/sda9 on /opt type reiserfs (rw,noatime,usrquota,grpquota)

This bug is really too old (2004) and it should have been closed a
long time ago. I do not understand
why some maintainers prefer to leave such bugs open.


--- End Message ---

Reply to: