On 3/4/13 3:00 AM, Ole Tange wrote: > On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 3/1/13 3:37 AM, Ole Tange wrote: > >>> Please consider providing an example in the man page for xfs_metadump e.g: >>> >>> xfs_metadump.sh -g /dev/sda2 meta.dump >> >> From the manpage, >> >> SYNOPSIS >> xfs_metadump [ -efgow ] [ -l logdev ] source target >> >> The source argument must be the pathname of >> the device or file containing the XFS filesystem >> >> and >> >> the target argument specifies the destination file name. >> >> is not enough? > > I have never run xfs_metadump before and I am in a state of worry that > my filesystem is toast. I would therefore like to be re-assured that > what I am doing is correct. I did that by reading and re-reading the > manual to make sure I had understood it correctly. By providing me > with an example of the right way to do it in the man page, I will feel > more confident that what I am about to do it correct and I could > probably save time by not having to re-read the manual. > > So I am not saying the information is not there, what I am saying is > that you in a simple way could make it easier to grasp the > information. Fair enough, maybe a concrete example is warranted. I suggested the meatadump for 2 reasons: 1) to get an image we could look at, to analyze the reason for the segfault, and 2) so you could run a "real" non-"n" xfs_repair on a metadata image as a more realistic dry run xfs_metadump only *reads* your filesystem, so there is nothing dangerous. But I understand your paranoia and worry. :) -Eric > > /Ole > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
