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

Re: Skipping fsck during boot with systemd?

On 12/29/2014 08:51 PM, Jerry Stuckle 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,
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

Someone may have suggested this, and I know it doesn't really
solve the
core problem, but perhaps consider suspending (to disk or ram)
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.



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

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.

Running ext4, the only time it has run fsck for me is when it had to. Otherwise I run it manually just to be sure.

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.

Why not run zfs?? Have you not considered it?? It STILL runs file maintenance but it runs while the file system is alive and running. It just slows down things unless you use a cron job when file service is more idle. Like at night. Give that a whirl. Problem solved. The average user has no need to interrupt fsck since fsck knows more about the need to run than the user does. It will run when it has to. Thank $DEITY$ for that.

"If the file system is found to have a problem at the booting time non interactive fsck is run and all errors which are considered safe to correct are corrected. But if still file system has problems the system boots in single user mode asking for user to manually run the fsck to correct the problems in file system."

You seriously want to mess with that? The logic escapes me. And, on top of that, to blame systemd? That's where we really part ways. Please read this:
:/ Ric

My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256

Reply to: