Re: Antw: [EXT] systemd-makefs with very slight data corruption ?

["Xogium" <contact@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
I don't use a tmpfs, because the data that is stored there is still useful to 
have, and preferably should not be lost. If it happens, alright, but in the best 
possible case it should be present.
On Thu Feb 13, 2020 at 8:22 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> >>> "Xogium" <contact@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 12.02.2020 um 19:19 in Nachricht
> <20538_1581532274_5E444471_20538_1493_1_C0KE5IL8FV0W.1GJ93L5AHSABJ@dragonstone>:
>
> 
> > Hi,
> > I am wondering about how to best implement a mechanism to recreate a 
> > specific 
> > filesystem in case of the slightest data corruption done to it. From what I
>
> 
> > read 
> > in systemd‑makefs manpage, the tool will not trigger if it can detect that a
>
> 
> > filesystem is already present. However I'm thinking that in some case, the 
> > data 
> > can get corrupted, yet the filesystem still is reported as ext4 to makefs. 
> > Perhaps I understood wrong, in which case, could I somehow order 
> > systemd‑makefs 
> > to be ran only if either systemd‑fsck fails, or if mounting fails ? This 
> > filesystem can easily get corrupted due to power loss, and isn't important 
> > for 
> > the entire system to work, however it would be nicer if this could be 
> > detected 
> > and delt with accordingly.
>
> 
> So why don't you use a tmpfs if the data can be lost anytime?
>
> 
>
> 
> > Thanks !
> > _______________________________________________
> > systemd‑devel mailing list
> > systemd‑devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd‑devel 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 

_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel