Hello Geoffrey,
All the hardware in question are via the standard onboard IDE
connections, but that's a great point, I do have a couple systems with
3ware RAID cards, best keep an eye on those.
--
Best regards,
Mickael
mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thursday, March 10, 2005, 1:59:36 PM, you wrote:
GG> Return-Path: <centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> Received: from c1m14.emaildefenseservice.com
GG> (c1m14.emaildefenseservice.com [216.40.36.47])
GG> by phoenix.silverservers.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j2ANE8Vt032101
GG> for <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:14:08 -0800
GG> Received: from mail.caosity.org [69.93.111.165] (EHLO mail.caosity.org)
GG> by c1m14.emaildefenseservice.com (mxl_mta-1.3.8-10p6)
GG> with ESMTP id 8c7d0324.28783.050.c1m14;
GG> Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:27:04 -0500 (EST)
GG> Received: from caos1.caosity.org (caos1 [127.0.0.1])
GG> by mail.caosity.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
GG> id C1829B3010E; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 21:59:42 +0000 (UTC)
GG> X-Original-To: centos@xxxxxxxxxxx
GG> Delivered-To: centos@xxxxxxxxxxx
GG> Received: from calmail-be3.berkeley.edu
GG> (mailfarm.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.61.106])
GG> by mail.caosity.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF5CB300A3
GG> for <centos@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 21:59:37 +0000 (UTC)
GG> Received: from [128.32.50.7] (account galitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
GG> by calmail-be3.berkeley.edu (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.2.6)
GG> with HTTP id 5149795 for centos@xxxxxxxxxxx;
GG> Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:59:36 -0800
GG> From: "Geoffrey Galitz" <galitz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> Subject: Re: [Centos] fsck -Broke?
GG> To: CentOS discussion and information list <centos@xxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.2.6
GG> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:59:36 -0800
GG> Message-ID: <web-5149795@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> In-Reply-To: <1242999433.20050310133012@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> References: <1242999433.20050310133012@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> MIME-Version: 1.0
GG> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
GG> X-BeenThere: centos@xxxxxxxxxxx
GG> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
GG> Precedence: list
GG> Reply-To: CentOS discussion and information list <centos@xxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> List-Id: CentOS discussion and information list <centos.caosity.org>
GG> List-Unsubscribe:
GG> <http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos>,
GG> <mailto:centos-request@xxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe>
GG> List-Archive: <http://lists.caosity.org/pipermail/centos>
GG> List-Post: <mailto:centos@xxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> List-Help: <mailto:centos-request@xxxxxxxxxxx?subject=help>
GG> List-Subscribe:
GG> <http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos>,
GG> <mailto:centos-request@xxxxxxxxxxx?subject=subscribe>
GG> Sender: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
GG> Errors-To: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
GG> X-MX-Spam: final=0.0230263158; heur=0.5000000000(-26400);
GG> stat=0.0100000000; spamtraq-heur=0.7000000000(2005031001)
GG> X-MX-MAIL-FROM: <centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
GG> X-MX-SOURCE-IP: [69.93.111.165]
GG> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
GG> X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by
GG> phoenix.silverservers.com id j2ANE8Vt032101
GG> X-UIDL: "g%"!AjU!!jR9"!*>T!!
GG> Is there anything unusual about the disk subsystem? Were
GG> the device drivers installed from an alternate source (e.g.
GG> 3w-9xxx)? I've seen this behavior immediately following updates
GG> when a new kernel is installed but the device driver is not
GG> carried forward.
GG> -geoff
GG> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:30:12 -0800
GG> Mickael Maddison <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hello CentOS,
>>
>> I've had cause to upgrade some 3.x machines that had a few ext2
>> partitions to ext3 (long story). Anyway, did the tune2fs -j /foo and
>> the journal is created. changed fstab to ext3
>>
>> Ok, that's fine. But in a couple cases, the machine was to be
>> rebooted in the 300day uptime range. upon reboot, the machine stated
>> that /foo was due for an fsck. Well, fsck sat there twiddling it's
>> thumbs indefinitely. I had to reboot to CDROM, and fsck from linux
>> rescue (which had no troubles). Then once fsck'd exit and reboot went
>> fine.
>>
>> Is this a problem with fsck, or ? I've never known fsck to hang
>> before. It usually does it's job or spits out an error.
>>
>> Of course, now that I know that, for most partitions I can unmount and
>> fsck before rebooting. sigh
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Mickael
>> mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
GG> ----------------------------------------------------------
GG> Geoff Galitz
GG> Chemistry Research Computing, UC Berkeley
GG> galitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx
GG> _______________________________________________
GG> CentOS mailing list
GG> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxxx
GG> http://lists.caosity.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
GG> __________ NOD32 1.1023 (20050310) Information __________
GG> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
GG> http://www.nod32.com
