FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-01-2010, 07:29 AM
Merciadri Luca
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

Hi,

When booting my computer this morning, fsck was not happy. Here is what
it said:

==
# cat /var/log/fsck/checkfs
Log of fsck -C -R -A -a
Tue Jun 1 09:00:07 2010

fsck 1.41.3 (12-Oct-2008)
/dev/sdc5 has been mounted 50 times without being checked, check forced.
/dev/sdc5: Inode 18554881 is in use, but has dtime set. FIXED.
/dev/sdc5: Inode 18554881 has imagic flag set.

/dev/sdc5: UNEXPECTED INCONSISTENCY; RUN fsck MANUALLY.
(i.e., without -a or -p options)
fsck died with exit status 4
==

What could I do when running fsck manually? Do I need to unmount the
related filesystem (i.e. /dev/sdc5) to check it, or not? And what do I
need to specify?
Thanks.

--
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
I use PGP. If there is an incompatibility problem with your mail
client, please contact me.


If it's worth doing, it's worth over-doing.
 
Old 06-01-2010, 07:44 AM
"Andrew M.A. Cater"
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 09:29:27AM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When booting my computer this morning, fsck was not happy. Here is what
> it said:
>
> ==
> # cat /var/log/fsck/checkfs
> Log of fsck -C -R -A -a
> Tue Jun 1 09:00:07 2010
>
> fsck 1.41.3 (12-Oct-2008)
> /dev/sdc5 has been mounted 50 times without being checked, check forced.
> /dev/sdc5: Inode 18554881 is in use, but has dtime set. FIXED.
> /dev/sdc5: Inode 18554881 has imagic flag set.
>
> /dev/sdc5: UNEXPECTED INCONSISTENCY; RUN fsck MANUALLY.
> (i.e., without -a or -p options)
> fsck died with exit status 4
> ==
>

e2fsck [-y] /dev/sdc5

[The optional -y answers "yes" to the prompts saying "Fix.[y/n]

e2fsck -a attempts an automatic fix of the commonest errors but is conservative and makes minimal
changes. If it fails / there's more than one thing wrong, it will bail out and ask for a manual fix, in
my experience anyway.

> What could I do when running fsck manually? Do I need to unmount the
> related filesystem (i.e. /dev/sdc5) to check it, or not? And what do I
> need to specify?

If you don't unmount it, e2fsck will complain. If need be, boot from a rescue disk to do so
- but I'm assuming that it's not the root (/) filesystem, or you wouldn't have got this far.

> Thanks.
>

Hope this helps,

All the best,

AndyC
> --
> Merciadri Luca
> See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
> I use PGP. If there is an incompatibility problem with your mail
> client, please contact me.
>
>
> If it's worth doing, it's worth over-doing.
>




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100601074439.GA22123@galactic.demon.co.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20100601074439.GA22123@galactic.demon.co.uk
 
Old 06-01-2010, 09:38 AM
Merciadri Luca
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 09:29:27AM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>
> e2fsck [-y] /dev/sdc5
>
> [The optional -y answers "yes" to the prompts saying "Fix.[y/n]
>
> e2fsck -a attempts an automatic fix of the commonest errors but is conservative and makes minimal
> changes. If it fails / there's more than one thing wrong, it will bail out and ask for a manual fix, in
> my experience anyway.
>
Thanks.
> If you don't unmount it, e2fsck will complain. If need be, boot from a rescue disk to do so
> - but I'm assuming that it's not the root (/) filesystem, or you wouldn't have got this far.
>
It will complain, but will it impede its `functioning'? I will probably
try with a rescue disk, effectively. What could have caused such errors
if I did not mistreat my computer these days?

--
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
I use PGP. If there is an incompatibility problem with your mail
client, please contact me.
 
Old 06-01-2010, 01:36 PM
Merciadri Luca
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@galactic.demon.co.uk> writes:

> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 09:29:27AM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When booting my computer this morning, fsck was not happy. Here is what
>> it said:
>>
>> ==
>> # cat /var/log/fsck/checkfs
>> Log of fsck -C -R -A -a
>> Tue Jun 1 09:00:07 2010
>>
>> fsck 1.41.3 (12-Oct-2008)
>> /dev/sdc5 has been mounted 50 times without being checked, check forced.
>> /dev/sdc5: Inode 18554881 is in use, but has dtime set. FIXED.
>> /dev/sdc5: Inode 18554881 has imagic flag set.
>>
>> /dev/sdc5: UNEXPECTED INCONSISTENCY; RUN fsck MANUALLY.
>> (i.e., without -a or -p options)
>> fsck died with exit status 4
>> ==
>>
>
> e2fsck [-y] /dev/sdc5
>
> [The optional -y answers "yes" to the prompts saying "Fix.[y/n]
>
> e2fsck -a attempts an automatic fix of the commonest errors but is conservative and makes minimal
> changes. If it fails / there's more than one thing wrong, it will bail out and ask for a manual fix, in
> my experience anyway.
Ok. I had to use e2fsck -y, and everything worked. This was clearly a
mess on my HDD, apparently. It must be dying. But I am still unable to
explain this. Thanks, though.

- --
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
- --

What doesn't kill you will make you stronger. (Friedrich Nietzsche)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAkwFDOwACgkQM0LLzLt8Mhy59wCeJf1eK1gfHF iIXxTQU+46xLoK
z3UAoKCd3FQ4IXWjQzfYtMMVagMZ4HsG
=QGl6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87bpbuswlu.fsf@merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRILUCA">http://lists.debian.org/87bpbuswlu.fsf@merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRILUCA
 
Old 06-01-2010, 01:41 PM
Ron Johnson
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

On 06/01/2010 04:38 AM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
[snip]

It will complain, but will it impede its `functioning'? I will probably
try with a rescue disk, effectively. What could have caused such errors
if I did not mistreat my computer these days?



Bug(s) in the OS or HDD firmware?

--
Dissent is patriotic, remember?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4C050E1B.2000702@cox.net">http://lists.debian.org/4C050E1B.2000702@cox.net
 
Old 06-01-2010, 02:44 PM
Merciadri Luca
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 06/01/2010 04:38 AM, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> [snip]
>> It will complain, but will it impede its `functioning'? I will probably
>> try with a rescue disk, effectively. What could have caused such errors
>> if I did not mistreat my computer these days?
>>
>
> Bug(s) in the OS or HDD firmware?
>
Well, the related files were actually some files which had nothing
special (i.e. not recent, not old, not often used, but sometimes used
too). Might a (correctly-)downloaded broken file corrupt the FS? I don't
think so (silly question).

--
Merciadri Luca
See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/
I use PGP. If there is an incompatibility problem with your mail
client, please contact me.


Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake. (Napoleon
Bonaparte)
 
Old 06-07-2010, 12:53 AM
Hendrik Boom
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 11:38:28 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:

> Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:

>> If you don't unmount it, e2fsck will complain. If need be, boot from a
>> rescue disk to do so - but I'm assuming that it's not the root (/)
>> filesystem, or you wouldn't have got this far.
>>
> It will complain, but will it impede its `functioning'?

It could impede its functioning if anything at all is written to the disk
while it is being checked. I can imagine it resulting in everything from
nothing to minor problems to indescribable chaos.

Don't go there if you value your data.

-- hendrik


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: huhfu0$lm9$1@dough.gmane.org">http://lists.debian.org/huhfu0$lm9$1@dough.gmane.org
 
Old 06-07-2010, 01:12 AM
Hendrik Boom
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:53:20 +0000, Hendrik Boom wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 11:38:28 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
>
>> Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
>
>>> If you don't unmount it, e2fsck will complain. If need be, boot from a
>>> rescue disk to do so - but I'm assuming that it's not the root (/)
>>> filesystem, or you wouldn't have got this far.
>>>
>> It will complain, but will it impede its `functioning'?
>
> It could impede its functioning if anything at all is written to the
> disk while it is being checked. I can imagine it resulting in
> everything from nothing to minor problems to indescribable chaos.
>
> Don't go there if you value your data.

And, of course, although I risk sounding like a broken record for saying
this yet again, when you've got this fixed, make sure you have a backup
of all your data.

But if you already have a backup, don't overwrite it with anew one until
you've fixed the problem and are sure that what you're backing up is
correct. It might even be worth dong a diff --recursive --brief (or
something similar depending on how your backup works) between your file
system and your backup and checking that the files that have changed are
the ones you expect to have changed...

-- hendrik


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: huhh24$lm9$2@dough.gmane.org">http://lists.debian.org/huhh24$lm9$2@dough.gmane.org
 
Old 06-07-2010, 06:41 AM
"Andrew M.A. Cater"
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 01:12:36AM +0000, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:53:20 +0000, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 11:38:28 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> >
> >> Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> >
> >>> If you don't unmount it, e2fsck will complain. If need be, boot from a
> >>> rescue disk to do so - but I'm assuming that it's not the root (/)
> >>> filesystem, or you wouldn't have got this far.
> >>>
> >> It will complain, but will it impede its `functioning'?
> >
> > It could impede its functioning if anything at all is written to the
> > disk while it is being checked. I can imagine it resulting in
> > everything from nothing to minor problems to indescribable chaos.
> >
> > Don't go there if you value your data.
>
> And, of course, although I risk sounding like a broken record for saying
> this yet again, when you've got this fixed, make sure you have a backup
> of all your data.
>
> But if you already have a backup, don't overwrite it with anew one until
> you've fixed the problem and are sure that what you're backing up is
> correct. It might even be worth dong a diff --recursive --brief (or
> something similar depending on how your backup works) between your file
> system and your backup and checking that the files that have changed are
> the ones you expect to have changed...

Further to this: a RAID is no infallible substitute for a backup of critical data.
A dying controller can write rubbish to your disks silently for days - even
if you just get a straightforward controller failure, you then have to treat all data
as potentially suspect for corruption.

Andy - who has lost one RAID to a controller failure and another to a failure of one disk
and unacceptable throughput - both in the space of about two weeks - both afer about 18 months
light-ish use.

If you have vital data, back it up into two or three places. If it's small enough, back it up
onto two or three different types of media - DVD-ROM, cheap flash drive _AND_ backup to hard disk
somewhere. If it's a document, save a copy in ASCII and/or print it. Have a good friend / family member
store some for you in their house - cheap "offsite" - on condition you store some for him/her.

Periodically, check you can get data back.

This is the counsel of perfection - no one EVER follows it - but if it saves someone's online life, business
, marriage or whatever, it'll be worth it

All best,

AndyC


>
> -- hendrik
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/huhh24$lm9$2@dough.gmane.org


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100607064158.GA24874@galactic.demon.co.uk">http://lists.debian.org/20100607064158.GA24874@galactic.demon.co.uk
 
Old 06-07-2010, 07:02 AM
Erwan David
 
Default FSCK seems angry with my filesystem

On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 08:41:58AM CEST, "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@galactic.demon.co.uk> said:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 01:12:36AM +0000, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:53:20 +0000, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 11:38:28 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote:
> > >
> > >> Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> > >
> > >>> If you don't unmount it, e2fsck will complain. If need be, boot from a
> > >>> rescue disk to do so - but I'm assuming that it's not the root (/)
> > >>> filesystem, or you wouldn't have got this far.
> > >>>
> > >> It will complain, but will it impede its `functioning'?
> > >
> > > It could impede its functioning if anything at all is written to the
> > > disk while it is being checked. I can imagine it resulting in
> > > everything from nothing to minor problems to indescribable chaos.
> > >
> > > Don't go there if you value your data.
> >
> > And, of course, although I risk sounding like a broken record for saying
> > this yet again, when you've got this fixed, make sure you have a backup
> > of all your data.
> >
> > But if you already have a backup, don't overwrite it with anew one until
> > you've fixed the problem and are sure that what you're backing up is
> > correct. It might even be worth dong a diff --recursive --brief (or
> > something similar depending on how your backup works) between your file
> > system and your backup and checking that the files that have changed are
> > the ones you expect to have changed...
>
> Further to this: a RAID is no infallible substitute for a backup of critical data.
> A dying controller can write rubbish to your disks silently for days - even
> if you just get a straightforward controller failure, you then have to treat all data
> as potentially suspect for corruption.

And a RAID will destroy data on all disks if asked to...
In 11 years administering backups, the most common use case for
recovery is "oups I destroyed the wrong file".

--
Erwan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100607070238.GJ11414@trusted-logic.com">http://lists.debian.org/20100607070238.GJ11414@trusted-logic.com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org