On 02/15/2012 03:09 PM, Frank Mayhar wrote: > 2012/2/15 Pádraig Brady <P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On 02/07/2012 09:05 PM, Frank Mayhar wrote: >>> This set of patches adds functions that help improve fsck operation in >>> large installations and when running in unattended or headless mode. It >>> adds support for reporting rusage statistics for the individual fsck >>> runs, for capturing fsck output, for killing fsck runs that take too >>> long and for running scripts when each fsck completes. >>> >>> We're currently using these functions to improve our fsck monitoring >>> capability and to replace some unwieldy and hard-to-maintain shell >>> scripts. >> >> Couldn't you do this with separate fsck command runs, >> and use standard system utils? > > Yes, of course. That's where the "unwieldy and hard-to-maintain shell > scripts" came in. Putting the functions in the wrapper itself, on the > other hand, means the scripts don't have to reimplement functions that > already exist there (like parallelizing the fsck runs or tracking exit > status), eliminates some external dependencies and makes the process > quite a bit less fragile. OK, thanks for the clarification. It seems to me that these functions are supported by quite simple shell scripting as I demonstrated. I do agree it's a margin call, but I'd be on the side of not bringing that logic within fsck. cheers, Pádraig. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
