<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.16.0"> </HEAD> <BODY> I'd just like to point out that it seems to take 40 minutes to scan a 500 GB volume! On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 11:05 +0200, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> On 27/09/2007 Oliver Grawert wrote: > > What about my alternative suggestion? It would still run fsck, but at > > > the same time be less annoying or not disturbing at all. > not wsure if you ever ran fsck manually, but you have to unmount the > partition you check or at least mount it readonly ... > > so no matter how far you will background it you wont be able to work > while it runs ... If the point of running that (annoying, indeed) fsck is to check for disk defect, why not running "badblocks" instead? It can do a read-only check on a mounted filesystem. You could modify that so that it runs only when other processes are not accessing the disk. In any case, having a journaled filesystem by default and blocking users while they might be in a hurry is not pleasant. At least leave the possibility of interrupting the check. Suppose you are at a conference, and it starts checking your disk, and you start your talk late for that reason. What will other people think about ubuntu? Is this good publicity? Vincenzo </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> </BODY> </HTML>