From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Mar 22 11:56:57 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEA9737B71F for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:56:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr06.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA18064; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:50:08 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr06.primenet.com(206.165.6.206) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAhlaymJ; Thu Mar 22 12:50:01 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA15736; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:56:43 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200103221956.MAA15736@usr06.primenet.com> Subject: Re: growfs To: fschapachnik@vianetworks.com.ar Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 19:56:43 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <200103221253.JAA29879@ns1.via-net-works.net.ar> from "Fernando Schapachnik" at Mar 22, 2001 09:53:02 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > It's called "fsresize" these days: > > > > http://www.nethelp.no/scsi/fsresize.c > > Mmmm... How is this related to: > http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=26529+28670+/usr/local/www/db/text/2000/freebsd-fs/20001210.freebsd-fs > > Are they different things? Same ecological niche. I think "growfs" is newer, which is why I picked it. I looked in the "man page searcher" at: http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/man.cgi?manpath=FreeBSD+5.0-current Which apparently doesn't cover -current. It seems that growfs in the -current source tree, however, according to my local CVS mirror. I don't know how hard a compile it would be on an older version of FreeBSD; if not hard, you'd think it would have been merged back for the 4.3 release. I've used "fsresize" before (it's been around a _long_ time), but haven't used "growfs". I think I wouldn't run either of them on a machine where I had not backed up the data already, and which was running on a UPS so that the process doesn't get interrupted in a state which will screw me (I'm not confident that the operations are ordered so as to prrevent this, or restartable, in the event of an interruption). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message