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 > Gentoo > Gentoo User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-07-2009, 04:05 PM
Philip Webb
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

In the course of trying to get X to work on my ASUS 1005HA netbook,
I had to power the machine off several times. In the course of this,
some damage seems to have occurred to the file system.
There are files in /var /tmp which I can't remove:
the msg is "EXT2-fs error: ext2_lookup: deleted inode referenced: 16388".

I got round the problem by creating new dirs, copying everything else
& renaming the dirs, but that leaves me with /bad1 , which I can't remove
as it contains a reference to an inode which no longer exists.
NB this is not the more common problem of a bad file name,
which cb dealt with simply by removing the inode (which still exists).

Can anyone help ?

BTW is Ext2 the best fs for this machine ? Might Ext3 or Ext4 be better ?
-- I use Reiserfs on my desktop machines.

--
========================,,======================== ====================
SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb
ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT `-O----------O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
 
Old 11-07-2009, 11:26 PM
Stroller
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

On 7 Nov 2009, at 17:05, Philip Webb wrote:

...
There are files in /var /tmp which I can't remove:
the msg is "EXT2-fs error: ext2_lookup: deleted inode referenced:
16388".


I got round the problem by creating new dirs, copying everything else
& renaming the dirs, but that leaves me with /bad1 , which I can't
remove

as it contains a reference to an inode which no longer exists. ...


Have you tried running fsck on the filesystem?

Stroller.
 
Old 11-08-2009, 01:46 AM
William Kenworthy
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 12:05 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> In the course of trying to get X to work on my ASUS 1005HA netbook,
> I had to power the machine off several times. In the course of this,
> some damage seems to have occurred to the file system.
> There are files in /var /tmp which I can't remove:
> the msg is "EXT2-fs error: ext2_lookup: deleted inode referenced: 16388".
>
> I got round the problem by creating new dirs, copying everything else
> & renaming the dirs, but that leaves me with /bad1 , which I can't remove
> as it contains a reference to an inode which no longer exists.
> NB this is not the more common problem of a bad file name,
> which cb dealt with simply by removing the inode (which still exists).
>
> Can anyone help ?
>
> BTW is Ext2 the best fs for this machine ? Might Ext3 or Ext4 be better ?
> -- I use Reiserfs on my desktop machines.
>


Have you tried fsk on it? - "man e2fsck"

The last question is a bit of a "how long is a piece of string"
question.

My personal experience is ext2 is only for those occasions you dont
value the data at all

ext3 isnt much better unless you use "data=journal" to get some basic
protection.

But instead of fiddling with such (deleted disparaging comment) file
systems, use reiserfs though this may need a complete reinstall .
Updates are still occuring to the reiserfs code in the kernel, so
reiserfs is not abandoned by any means.

ext4, reiserfs4, btfs and the like are too new for me, though I like the
look of btfs.

I have read some interesting articles in the past about the ext
filesystem devs and their inside track on rieserfs in the kernel and the
war of words that surrounds it. My personal experience with ext2/3
supports the view that the ext filesystems didn't fairly win the
argument based on performance and data protection. Enough said.

Unfortunately, filesystems are a very complex and emotive subject with
no one choice fits all solution. My suggestion is you have lost data
and have problems with what you are using ... time to move on, try ext3
(with "data=journal") next - because you can fix ext2 with e2fsck
(though probably lose some data in the process, but ...), convert to
ext3 then mount with "data=journal" without having to reinstall. Google
for the commands needed ... worked for me.

Have fun
BillK
 
Old 11-08-2009, 05:35 AM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

On Sunday 08 November 2009 04:46:50 William Kenworthy wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 12:05 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:

> > BTW is Ext2 the best fs for this machine ? Might Ext3 or Ext4 be better
> > ? -- I use Reiserfs on my desktop machines.
>
> Have you tried fsk on it? - "man e2fsck"
>
> The last question is a bit of a "how long is a piece of string"
> question.
>
> My personal experience is ext2 is only for those occasions you dont
> value the data at all
>
> ext3 isnt much better unless you use "data=journal" to get some basic
> protection.

That turns on the journal which will wear out an SSD in short order, so ext2
is indeed the better file system

> But instead of fiddling with such (deleted disparaging comment) file
> systems, use reiserfs though this may need a complete reinstall .
> Updates are still occuring to the reiserfs code in the kernel, so
> reiserfs is not abandoned by any means.

I use reiser everywhere else but not on my netbook. Have you used it on an SSD
and if so, what results did you get

> ext4, reiserfs4, btfs and the like are too new for me, though I like the
> look of btfs.

All conventional filesystems are built in such a way as to suit rotating disk
media. Not surprising, as those were the only disks available for many a year.

SSDs however, are very different, especially the cheap nasty controllers that
go into netbooks. I think one should be willing to experiment with those, see
what comes up.


--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
 
Old 11-08-2009, 09:25 AM
Philip Webb
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

091108 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 12:05 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
>> is Ext2 the best fs for this machine ? Might Ext3 or Ext4 be better ?
>> -- I use Reiserfs on my desktop machines.
> the journal will wear out an SSD in short order,
> so ext2 is indeed the better file system
> All conventional filesystems are built to suit rotating disk media.
> SSDs are very different, esp the cheap nasty controllers in netbooks.

Sensible advice, no doubt, for those using SSDs in their netbooks,
but as I said in my OP, my ASUS 1005HA has a 160 GB hard disk (HDD),
whence the letter 'H' in its name.

--
========================,,======================== ====================
SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb
ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT `-O----------O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
 
Old 11-08-2009, 09:49 AM
daid kahl
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

> There are files in */var */tmp *which I can't remove:
> the msg is "EXT2-fs error: ext2_lookup: deleted inode referenced: 16388".
>
> Can anyone help ?
>

Did you try removing it from a live Linux distro (ie: on a USB stick)?

Or if it lets you move it, maybe you can move it to the temporary file
system created in the RAM by a live install, and then when you reboot
into your normal system the RAM is cleared.

~daid
 
Old 11-08-2009, 11:14 AM
pk
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

Alan McKinnon wrote:

> That turns on the journal which will wear out an SSD in short order, so ext2
> is indeed the better file system

http://thunk.org/tytso/blog/2009/03/01/ssds-journaling-and-noatimerelatime/

Best regards

Peter K
 
Old 11-08-2009, 02:27 PM
Alan McKinnon
 
Default "deleted inode referenced"

On Sunday 08 November 2009 12:25:19 Philip Webb wrote:
> 091108 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 12:05 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> >> is Ext2 the best fs for this machine ? Might Ext3 or Ext4 be better ?
> >> -- I use Reiserfs on my desktop machines.
> >
> > the journal will wear out an SSD in short order,
> > so ext2 is indeed the better file system
> > All conventional filesystems are built to suit rotating disk media.
> > SSDs are very different, esp the cheap nasty controllers in netbooks.
>
> Sensible advice, no doubt, for those using SSDs in their netbooks,
> but as I said in my OP, my ASUS 1005HA has a 160 GB hard disk (HDD),
> whence the letter 'H' in its name.

Yes, I saw that in another post you made. I find it harder and harder to keep
track of what is shipped with what product these days...

:-)

--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:37 AM.

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