Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:37:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Jakub Lach <jakub_lach@mailplus.pl> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS journal error on 10.0-CURRENT Message-ID: <1346359078818-5739408.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1208301942100.1498@s560x.c0c0.intra> References: <CADL2u4j1rJfvx1QnpD3kiJxQ1rb04amOHx__C9fHQJPEAZtNbg@mail.gmail.com> <1346329887307-5739274.post@n5.nabble.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1208301942100.1498@s560x.c0c0.intra>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yes, if I would answer 'yes' to using journal, there would be unexpected free inodes (?) or something like that in syslog and inconsistencies if full fsck would be performed. Basically if I have answered 'yes' to using journal, fs would always be marked 'clean' regardless of state. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/UFS-journal-error-on-10-0-CURRENT-tp5739231p5739408.html Sent from the freebsd-current mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1346359078818-5739408.post>