From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Sat Mar 10 03:01:05 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B862FF424BF for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 03:01:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dab@freebsd.org) Received: from qproxy6-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (qproxy6-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.23.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 349617D839 for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 03:01:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dab@freebsd.org) Received: from CMOut01 (unknown [10.0.90.82]) by qproxy6.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F41140638 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 19:36:32 -0700 (MST) Received: from host305.hostmonster.com ([74.220.215.105]) by CMOut01 with id L2cT1x00b2H155E012cWWT; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 19:36:32 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=ft6sXBwf c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=oRSXaeV14bi+UgmAP6q2Hg==:117 a=oRSXaeV14bi+UgmAP6q2Hg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=v2DPQv5-lfwA:10 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=GOsVCeYTcul28fUrr7wA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22 Received: from d192-24-6-24.try.wideopenwest.com ([24.192.24.6]:60592 helo=[192.168.1.122]) by host305.hostmonster.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89_1) (envelope-from ) id 1euUN1-003Txt-IE; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 19:36:27 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) Subject: Re: svn commit: r328013 - head/sbin/fsck_ffs From: David Bright In-Reply-To: <1520634689.84937.74.camel@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 21:36:25 -0500 Cc: Mark Johnston , src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201801151925.w0FJPCKA019434@repo.freebsd.org> <20180309220940.GG6174@raichu> <1520634689.84937.74.camel@freebsd.org> To: Ian Lepore X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host305.hostmonster.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - FreeBSD.org X-BWhitelist: no X-Source-IP: 24.192.24.6 X-Exim-ID: 1euUN1-003Txt-IE X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: d192-24-6-24.try.wideopenwest.com ([192.168.1.122]) [24.192.24.6]:60592 X-Source-Auth: david@bright-family.net X-Email-Count: 1 X-Source-Cap: YnJpZ2h0ZmE7YnJpZ2h0ZmE7aG9zdDMwNS5ob3N0bW9uc3Rlci5jb20= X-Local-Domain: no X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2018 03:01:05 -0000 On Mar 9, 2018, at 17:31, Ian Lepore wrote: >=20 > On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 17:09 -0500, Mark Johnston wrote: >>=20 >> etc/rc.d/fsck doesn't know how to interpret the new exit code and now >> just drops to a single-user shell when it is encountered. [=E2=80=A6] >>=20 >> Is there any reason etc/rc.d/fsck shouldn't automatically retry (up = to This is, in fact, the reason that I made the change I did. I was trying = to put in a retry loop to rc.d/fsck, but found that I couldn=E2=80=99t = get it to work because fsck and fsck_ffs were not exiting with non-zero = status. The drop to single user is not really due to the specific (new) = error code of 16, it is due to the fact that fsck_ffs is now exiting = with a non-zero status when it hasn=E2=80=99t completely cleaned the = file system; /any/ non-zero status would cause the current rc.d/fsck = script to go to single user. Prior to my change, fsck_ffs was exiting = with a zero status even though it had not completely cleaned the = filesystem and told the user to run it again. >=20 > fsck_ffs already has a -R flag to automatically retry, wouldn't that = be > a better mechanism for handling this new type of retry? That=E2=80=99s true; however, there is currently no way to pass that = flag through the filesystem-agnostic fsck wrapper called from rc.d/fsck = to the filesystem-specific fsck_ffs program that it calls. One could = implement a similar flag on the fsck wrapper to be passed along to the = filesystem-specific checker, but I think fsck_ffs is the only one that = currently implements such a flag.=20 --=20 David Bright dab@FreeBSD.org