From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 1 13:48:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A638916A4CE; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:48:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B95043D1D; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:48:40 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA2E49114E; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:48:33 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 99058-03; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:48:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (blk-222-46-91.eastlink.ca [24.222.46.91]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7531449114A; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:48:33 -0300 (ADT) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 811A639F7D; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:48:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FB7339EAA; Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:48:38 -0300 (ADT) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:48:38 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Don Lewis In-Reply-To: <200410010407.i91471ts042635@gw.catspoiler.org> Message-ID: <20041001104748.T31631@ganymede.hub.org> References: <200410010407.i91471ts042635@gw.catspoiler.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: fsck_ffs patch testers wanted X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:48:40 -0000 On Thu, 30 Sep 2004, Don Lewis wrote: > On 30 Sep, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> >> Would you be willing to post a 4.x version of this, or send me one, that I >> can test, since I'm the one that seems lucky to get the "glacially slow" >> fsck's :( > > I was planning on posting a 4.x version sometime after I did the commit > to -CURRENT and it had time to get well exercised by the masses. My > plan is to allow about a month of testing between the commit to -CURRENT > and the MFC. > >> Also, some sort of "what I should be watching for" would be nice, if >> anything ... I've got my remote techs "trained" so that they can get me >> into single user mode so that I can watch fsck using ctl-t, so I can >> install this as a seperate fsck and manually test it as required ... > > Things to watch out for are fsck going berzerk and deleting all your > files. The behaviour should be the same as the unpatched version of > fsck other than the worst case time it takes to get through pass 4. > > I just cranked out the 4.x patch below. I've only given it some light > testing, mostly just running versions of fsck with and without the patch > in read-only mode (-n option) on the same file system and comparing the > fsck output. I've done this on a clean file system, and one with some > minor inconsistencies. I'm almost due for a crash, its been ~25days since the last one, so should be able to test it 'real soon now' :) ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664