fsck on boot is major usability issue
jmusther at gmail.com
Fri Dec 21 09:36:20 UTC 2007
It would be interesting to hear how people feel about having an
interruptible check on boot, versus moving the check to shutdown?
Certainly an interruptible check is an improvement, but is it still lacking
Also, would the user have to skip the check within a timeout (something like
"Press enter within 10 seconds to skip"), or would they be able to cancel it
at any point?
Personally, I think having the check at boot is inconvenient, even if it can
be skipped, but what do others think?
On Dec 21, 2007 9:37 PM, Martin Pitt <martin.pitt at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> Jonathan Musther [2007-12-21 9:16 +1300]:
> > I'm new to this list, I joined it because I saw in the archive that
> > recently you were discussing the problem with running fsck on boot as a
> > 'just in case' filesystem check.
> We quickly discussed this at the last UDS. Most people were not in
> favor of dropping the check completely, since occasionally, things
> just go wrong, and you never notice until you actually run a check.
> We proposed some changes in  to alleviate this:
> * Make the boot-time check interruptible if the file system was
> clean, and print out a message when a check happens (otherwise the
> user does not know at all what's going on).
> * Offer some 'check now'/'check at next boot' (depending on whether
> the partition is currently mounted) buttons in the drive properties
> in the UI.
>  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Specs/PartitionManagement
> Martin Pitt http://www.piware.de
> Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com
> Debian Developer http://www.debian.org
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
> Ubuntu-devel-discuss at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
Slingshot - a unique game everyone enjoys - and it's free :-)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss