On 5/5/14, 6:59 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 01:03:17PM +0200, Lukáš Czerner wrote: >> >> However we might to go a step further, because I do not >> really like the idea of allowing to mount the file system with >> errors by default. It does not really make sense to me and I wonder >> whether someone actually intend to do it this way. > > We would need to make an exception for the root file system, of > course. And I've been receiving patches from folks who want to allow > e2fsck to be able to fix a mounted, read-only /usr partition, since > systemd is forcing folks to have to mount /usr read-only before it > will start, which means /usr needs to be mounted before e2fsck gets > started by systemd. I hope these patches make it to the list, if you're considering them. I don't really know why fsck would need to treat filesystems differently based on where they are mounted; either we can repair a readonly fs or not, right? And if it's done, then the filesystem needs to be immediately unmounted & remounted[1], or the system rebooted... -Eric [1] and I suppose if it can be unmounted & mounted then there was no good reason to repair it while mounted RO... -- 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
