On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 04:45:02AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > Running e2fsck on a quiescent (but mounted) filesystem fails in the > common case where the superblock inode and block count summaries are > wrong. The kernel doesn't update these values except at unmount time. > If there are other errors in the filesystem then they will already > cause e2fsck to consider the filesystem invalid, so these minor errors > should not. Sure, but *when* would it ever be safe to run e2fsck without -n on a mounted filesystem? What's the scenario where this would matter? And on an unmounted filesystem, if the block counts are wrong, and the user refuses to fix them the filesystem technically really isn't 100% valid. - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
