Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 22:08:56 +0200 From: "Oleg V. Naumann" <oleg@reis.zp.ua> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: background_fsck and kernel without SOFTUPDATES Message-ID: <20040326200856.GG21046@core.zp.ua>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Here is small problem. After removing 'options SOFTUPDATES'
from my kernel and rebooting I noticed message from fsck:
'kernel lacks background fsck support'. After that fsck
leaves fs's in the inconsistent state. Yes, I know about dependency
between SOFTUPDATES and background fsck. But from my point of view it
looks better if /etc/rc.d/fsck will be fallback to the traditional
fsck way, if kernel lacks SOFTUPDATES support, may be in some
manner as that:
[root@core]/etc/rc.d# diff -u fsck.orig fsck
--- fsck.orig Mon Jan 20 16:37:47 2003
+++ fsck Fri Mar 26 20:48:02 2004
@@ -36,6 +36,11 @@
echo "Starting file system checks:"
case ${OSTYPE} in
FreeBSD)
/sbin/sysctl debug.max_softdeps > /dev/null 2>&1
+ if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
+ echo "warning: SOFTUPDATES not supported, fallback to the foreground check"
+ background_fsck="NO"
+ fi
if checkyesno background_fsck; then
fsck -F -p
else
It looks like fsck_ffs does check more that one sysctl which supports
SOFTUPDATES, may be 'debug.max_softdeps' is not better, but idea clear
here, I hope. I can fill a PR, if it is advisable.
--
NO37-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040326200856.GG21046>