regular fsck runs are too disturbing

John Dong john.dong at gmail.com
Wed Oct 10 14:17:27 UTC 2007


A partial check doesn't make sense with the current fsck tools AFAIK. We
should do a full filesystem check if anything, and if a user decides to abort
it, it's his choice.

There should be a graphical or otherwise easily accessible way of re-touching
the /forcefsck flag so that users can choose which bootup to do a check on.
Another "idea" is on LVM-capable systems to take a snapshot of important
filesystems while they are unmounted or read-only then fsck the snapshot
device as a background task. If any serious errors are detected in the
snapshot, then schedule an uncancelable boot scan.

I agree with everyone who says that the current fsck experience is a blemish
to Ubuntu's general user-friendliness, and also that we should not be entirely
removing the regular fsck as it catches hardware irregularities and potential
software bugs with ext3.


John

On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 01:25:54PM +0200, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote:
> Problem is that users will just skip the test, and get tired of "having"
> to skip the test each time. Perhaps an alternative would be to check
> only a part of the filesystem (e.g. randomly choosen) each time, but I
> don't know enough about filesystem (even though I should :) ) to say
> it's impossible or feasible.
> 
> Vincenzo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/attachments/20071010/dc47af05/attachment.pgp>


More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list