| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
xmit
Apprentice
Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 158
Location: Hamburg, Germany
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2004 8:07 am Post subject: fstab example in manual unfavorable? |
 |
|
There is a fstab example in the installation manual:
| Code: | /dev/hda1 /boot ext2 noauto,noatime 1 2
/dev/hda2 none swap sw 0 0
/dev/hda3 / ext3 noatime 0 1 |
Why do you set the check flag for the ext3 partition here (the final 1 instead of 0)?
I think this leeds to the annoying phaenomen, that after some boots the root partition becomes checked which is quite time consuming and useless. Ext3 is a journaling file system and does not need to be checked. Am I wrong? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Skotlex
Guru
Joined: 13 Mar 2004
Posts: 306
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose it's for extra security... that 1 is what the fstab manual says the root partition should have:
The sixth field, (fs_passno), is used by the fsck(8) program to deter-
mine the order in which filesystem checks are done at reboot time. The root filesystem should be specified with a fs_passno of 1, and other
filesystems should have a fs_passno of 2. Filesystems within a drive
will be checked sequentially, but filesystems on different drives will
be checked at the same time to utilize parallelism available in the
hardware. If the sixth field is not present or zero, a value of zero
is returned and fsck will assume that the filesystem does not need to
be checked.
I wonder how many people leave that 1 there in their fstab anyway... the checking on boot doesn't takes long, and is not like you boot every half hour as to become annoying. Redundant security? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
plasmagunman
l33t
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 604
Location: berlin
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2004 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
even journaled filesystems need to be checked. the journal assures that only the part of the last write-access will be checked and not the whole disk. therefore journaled filesystems check faster.
anyway, the filesystem-check should perform it's checks only if the partition wasn't cleanly unmounted. to make things more funny "fsck.ext3", "fsck.reiserfs", etc. behave in a different manner, reading their manpages is really confusing and funny...
_________________
please, feel free to correct my english. - por favor, corrige mi español. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Installing Gentoo
