Re: The sixth field (fs_passno) should be zero
On 24 November 2015 at 04:45, Christoph Anton Mitterer
<calestyo@scientia.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 03:23 +0000, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
>> btrfs check is a destructive tool, that can attempt repairing btrfs
>> filesystem. it should not be run automatically, nor non-interractive,
>> nor on each boot.
> What source is that information based on?
> To my knowledge, and I think I read that even few days ago on the btrfs
> mailing list (though I may be mistaken), it's only destructive in case
> you run it with e.g. --repair or some other arguments.
>
>
>> ditto xfs_repair.
> from the manpage:
> -n No modify mode. Specifies that xfs_repair should not modify the
> filesystem but should only scan the filesystem and indicate what
> repairs would have been made.
>
> If it may do changes nevertheless, than that's IMHO quite some grave
> documentation bug.
>
>
>> they do not, instead they ship fsck.btrfs shell script, that exits
>> zero and does nothing. Ditto xfs.
> Yes I know, but that also may have been just forgotten to change.
>
>
> Anyway,.. I've wrote a mail to linux-btrfs asking for the plans.
> So far Duncan replied that it's probably still not suggested to be run
> at boot (though he's only a list regular, not a developer).
> We'll see whether one of the devs comments about the long term plans...
Yes, you have three options:
- no-opt (exit 0 shell script, fsck(8) compatible maintenance interface)
- expensive no-opt (ie. heavy disk io, recalculating and verifying
checksums, et.al. which does not modify any datastructures)
- destructive, i.e. mutating data structure, operation with repair.
Last one is not to be run in an automated¸ non-interractive way. The
other two are no-opt, as nothing will actually be done to disk and
output hidden behind bootsplashes et.al.
--
Regards,
Dimitri.
Reply to: