Re: Fwd: Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?
On 12/29/2014 9:33 PM, William Unruh wrote:
>> On 12/29/2014 1:27 PM, Ric Moore wrote:
>>> On 12/29/2014 06:44 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>> On 12/29/2014 1:22 AM, Ric Moore wrote:
>>>>> On 12/28/2014 10:58 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/28/2014 5:54 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday 28 December 2014 00:20:20 Celejar wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 14:02:52 -0500
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jerry Stuckle <stucklejerry@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/11/2014 1:23 PM, Brian wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu 11 Dec 2014 at 12:11:26 -0500, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I often give presentations with my notebook. If I'm lucky, I get
>>>>>>>>>>> 10-15 minutes to set up. If I'm not, less than 5 minutes (i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>> another presenter ahead of me). I use Linux whenever possible,
>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>> since my time slot is limited, I can't wait for fsck to complete.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your type of situation is well understood and there is sympathy
>>>>>>>>>> for it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I appreciate that - but unfortunately, sympathy doesn't solve the
>>>>>>>>> problem
>>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Someone may have suggested this, and I know it doesn't really
>>>>>>>> solve the
>>>>>>>> core problem, but perhaps consider suspending (to disk or ram)
>>>>>>>> instead
>>>>>>>> of shutting down when you have a presentation scheduled?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again, that is a way round the problem not a solution to it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A facility that was available no longer is. Whether it should be,
>>>>>>> is an
>>>>>>> entirely different question.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lisi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lisi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While I agree it's only a way around a problem and not a solution, I do
>>>>>> appreciate people trying to help out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And while I would prefer a solution, it looks like that's not going to
>>>>>> happen. So, unfortunately, after many years as a Debian user, I'm
>>>>>> looking at other options. My clients are looking, also, although not
>>>>>> every one has made the decision to switch yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's wrong with sticking with Wheezy for the next couple of years?? I
>>>>> haven't had my ext4 file system want to fsck in eons. Several times I
>>>>> have MADE it do a check on the next boot, just to check, and a Tbyte of
>>>>> storage was fscked in about 10-15 seconds.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not as easy as you think. I write device drivers; for instance, one of
>>>> my customers manufacturers microprocessor-based systems. Right now they
>>>> are using Debian, but are now looking for another distro. It's not
>>>> something they do lightly or quickly; even now they may not have time
>>>> before service is dropped for Wheezy. And I need to be running the same
>>>> software they are.
>>>>
>>>>> Besides, I never did buy that bit about doing a complete dist-upgrade to
>>>>> Jessie (testing!) and then expecting to do a presentation to clients
>>>>> without a complete shakedown. I'd shoot myself first. I know you know
>>>>> better.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where did I ever say I wouldn't do a complete shakedown? But this is
>>>> the type of bug which can bite you weeks or months after the install.
>>>> It doesn't occur minutes, hours or even days later. And Murphy says it
>>>> will happen at the worst possible time.
>>>>
>>>>> Can we not let this pitiful excuse for a thread JUST DIE?? :/ Ric
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is a Debian User list. Why don't you want bugs which affect Debian
>>>> users discussed here? And that's what I have seen here - at least until
>>>> you started complaining about the thread.
>>>
>>> There we differ. You consider it a bug, and I consider it a feature.
>>> When I googled on the topic there was a Hail Mary chorus shouting "DO
>>> not interrupt fsck! It's BAD!". Ergo the consensus of opinion that if it
>>> is critical enough, do not allow it to be interrupted. Tough titties, as
>>> the process is for your own good.
>>>
>>
>> I agree it's not a good idea to interrupt fsck WHEN IT IS FIXING A
>> PROBLEM. A routine test when there is no indication of a problem is a
>> completely different story.
>>
>>> It's a small price to pay when you look back at the days when a Windows
>>> server HAD to go down at 3AM "for maintenance" (defrag, which took quite
>>> awhile) while we laughed and laughed at the stupid lamers who used it
>>> and suffered. I know I did.
>>>
>>
>> It can be a HUGE problem. For instance - maybe I'm getting ready to
>> make a presentation to a VP of a client's company. The success of this
>> project depends on my presentation being more successful than another
>> consultants. fsck running right then can easily cost me tens of
>> thousands of dollars over the course of the contract.
>>
>> Are YOU willing to reimburse me for that loss?
>>
>>> But, you sure as hell wouldn't interrupt a Windows full defrag process
>>> half-way through, would you? We've had it easy, so I consider it a
>>> feature. I'll take a 20 second inconvenience any day. :) Ric
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I can, and I have, when it runs at an inconvenient time. Windows allows
>> this, and terminates the defrag gracefully. That's one thing Windows
>> has on Debian.
>>
>> Just because it's OK for YOU to have fsck to run any time it wants does
>> NOT mean it's ok for everyone else.
>>
>> And that's what this thread is all about - how to stop it from happening.
>>
>> But it will probably not matter to me, anyway. My clients are looking
>> for alternatives to Debian just because of crap like this. And we're
>> talking a lot of Debian systems running in dedicated controllers.
>>
>
> That seems to be cutting off you nose to spite your face. As many have
> told you, the default now seems to be to never do preventative fscks, so
> "crap like this" does not exist. While I certainly agree that systemd
> has its faults, hunting for and learning a whole new distro, with its
> own peculiarities and yes, bugs, will take up way way more of your time
> that figuring out how to whip Debian into shape for yourselves. Since
> you clients are on dedicated controllers, they have already done a lot
> of customisation, which will have to be redone.
>
>
No, from what I've seen, the default is to do preventative fscks,
depending on the number of boots (and time? I'm not sure). It does
exist, but as others have indicated, THIS problem can be gotten around.
It's not me making the decision - it's my clients. They know what they
have to do, and how it will affect them having to maintain two (or more)
distros for several years. And I have to follow their lead; it's their
systems, after all.
I don't know how many system they sell a month - they don't release that
information, and quite frankly, as curious as I am, it's none of my
business. My job is to write device drivers. They have Linux admins
and system programmers who make the decisions on distros, packages, and
other software.
And the automatic fsck is not the only problem they see in Jessie. It's
just the one affecting me the most.
Jerry
Reply to: