From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 4 16:33:11 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F29416A420 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:33:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cracauer@koef.zs64.net) Received: from koef.zs64.net (koef.zs64.net [212.12.50.230]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC1013C47E for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 16:33:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cracauer@koef.zs64.net) Received: from koef.zs64.net (koef.zs64.net [212.12.50.230]) by koef.zs64.net (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m14GX8oa096377; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:33:08 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from cracauer@koef.zs64.net) Received: (from cracauer@localhost) by koef.zs64.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m14GX8BE096376; Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:33:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from cracauer) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:33:08 -0500 From: Martin Cracauer To: "Julian H. Stacey" Message-ID: <20080204163308.GA96092@cons.org> References: <20080201172214.GA55957@cons.org> <200802021916.m12JGUjN049706@fire.js.berklix.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200802021916.m12JGUjN049706@fire.js.berklix.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Martin Cracauer Subject: Re: fsck and mount disagree on whether superblocks are usable X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 16:33:11 -0000 Julian H. Stacey wrote on Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 08:16:30PM +0100: > Martin Cracauer wrote: > > This is not an emergency but I find it odd. Mount and fsck agree on > > whether superblocks are usable. Mount can mount readonly, but fsck > > can use neither the primary superblock nor the alternatives. > > > > 32 is not a file system superblock > > Just in case, You know secondary block on newer FSs moved from 32 ? > Ref man fsck_ufs > -b Use the block specified immediately after the flag as the super > block for the file system. An alternate super block is usually > located at block 32 for UFS1, and block 160 for UFS2. Thanks, Julian. I'm honestly don't know how to tell whether I have ufs1 or ufs2. Anyone? The source machines runs 6-stable, the receiver runs 7-stable, but the filesystems have been created long in the past. I also think I might have a disk geometry problem here, that blocks aren't where they are supposed to be. I ran fsck by disabling the check to the second superblock, just using the first one. I lost some files but not enough to have an outright block mapping mixup. The whole thing still looks strange. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ FreeBSD - where you want to go, today. http://www.freebsd.org/