Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:26:25 +0100 From: Ruben de Groot <mail25@bzerk.org> To: Peter Risdon <peter@circlesquared.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How dangerous is 5.2 for production use Message-ID: <20040123102625.GA27890@ei.bzerk.org> In-Reply-To: <4010EE2E.3050200@circlesquared.com> References: <4010DF2B.1070804@ant.uni-bremen.de> <20040123091337.GA46755@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <4010EE2E.3050200@circlesquared.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 09:49:34AM +0000, Peter Risdon typed: > Matthew Seaman wrote: > > >Certainly. You will find it better suited to the large filesystems > > > >you have than UFS1. I also have a vague feeling that background fsck > >is a UFS2 feature, but I can't find documentation to either confirm or > >deny that. > > > > > > > I'm sure this is right. If one of my 5.* machines has an un-clean > shutdown it states that it is starting background fsck checks as it > completes its boot process. True, but not only on UFS2. It works just as well on UFS1 filesystems. Ruben > PWR. > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040123102625.GA27890>