From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May  1 15:55:14 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17FD8D1A
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Wed,  1 May 2013 15:55:14 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com)
Received: from mail-we0-x235.google.com (mail-we0-x235.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::235])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97063160E
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Wed,  1 May 2013 15:55:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id s8so513997wey.40
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 01 May 2013 08:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
 h=x-received:date:from:to:subject:message-id:x-mailer:mime-version
 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=jjMF3rPnJn7jkfaNkS2MgrArx2373GmiKBF6Barug18=;
 b=eO/k/o9yBmULsQx0Hgn8JyYhorhN+kwg6UrkFWZhapndBlpNsT3fbB/5nSuR1aSOye
 7pXCS0O1jORotIwKcdS/cje8Fl9lL5HUuOEdjSAjkyDUFgk1xH1UKkOwEjAlVnkHMstd
 /xijMNRI7NWYHQKE3uReYpxROq9jOshbW7Nzc2SFn/n/MvmVhQjgfN+wM8aHzH49bx+e
 tWAOgVPQCuSOWFBbqSQWKxzrFz8FFgmDsY7m7v2jR0gUf3Iu2RZ4122kPCm8xkY1vTeF
 1l7vw/j42wHV3fbNQMS0L0noWPMF17FzaAVIS60lMENoZFIXbGnE9mMCIHf9PqfdGsFu
 X2Bw==
X-Received: by 10.180.24.69 with SMTP id s5mr30469288wif.34.1367423712621;
 Wed, 01 May 2013 08:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (87-194-105-247.bethere.co.uk.
 [87.194.105.247])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nf9sm32959194wic.3.2013.05.01.08.55.11
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Wed, 01 May 2013 08:55:11 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 16:55:10 +0100
From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: fsck -y and SU+J
Message-ID: <20130501165510.4b78c88f@gumby.homeunix.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.17; amd64-portbld-freebsd10.0)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 15:55:14 -0000

I see that if you run fsck on a filesystem with SU+J turned-on, fsck
asks whether you want to use the journal.

This causes a problem when running fsck -y. The traditional meaning of
this command was: do a thorough, unconditional, non-interactive check;
but now SU+J filesystems only get a journal sync.

I can't even see the point in the question, surely someone that was
content to use the journal would do a preen.

This in 10-CURRENT. I'm not sure if it's like this in 9.1 or 9-STABLE, I
only spent a week there trying to get intel kms graphics working on new
hardware, so I'm new to SU+J.