Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-06 Thread Chuck Stickelman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 3/4/99 7:40:39 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > writes: > > > > The appear to be tools to `defrag' an ext2 > > > partition, but I never saw any convincing reasons for using them. They > > > may even be a risk to your data. > > > > I'v

Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-05 Thread Stephen Pitts
On Thu, Mar 04, 1999 at 11:05:46AM -0500, Raymond A. Ingles wrote: > On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote: > > > > In a message dated 3/4/99 7:40:39 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL > > > PROTECTED] > > > writes: > > > > > > So, defragging your disk isn't a normal Debian maintenance tas

Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-04 Thread Raymond A. Ingles
On Thu, 4 Mar 1999, E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote: > > In a message dated 3/4/99 7:40:39 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL > > PROTECTED] > > writes: > > > > So, defragging your disk isn't a normal Debian maintenance task? Is this > > true > > for all you guys that have been running Debian "forever"

Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-04 Thread E.L. Meijer \(Eric\)
> > In a message dated 3/4/99 7:40:39 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > writes: > > > > The appear to be tools to `defrag' an ext2 > > > partition, but I never saw any convincing reasons for using them. They > > > may even be a risk to your data. > > > > I've tried the ext2 def

Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-04 Thread Nathan E Norman
On Thu, 4 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : In a message dated 3/4/99 7:40:39 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] : writes: : : > > The appear to be tools to `defrag' an ext2 : > > partition, but I never saw any convincing reasons for using them. They : > > may even be a risk

Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-04 Thread MallarJ
In a message dated 3/4/99 7:40:39 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > The appear to be tools to `defrag' an ext2 > > partition, but I never saw any convincing reasons for using them. They > > may even be a risk to your data. > > I've tried the ext2 defrag program, and wh

Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-04 Thread Tom Pfeifer
> The appear to be tools to `defrag' an ext2 > partition, but I never saw any convincing reasons for using them. They > may even be a risk to your data. I've tried the ext2 defrag program, and while it seems to work OK, I didn't see any noticable benefit from doing it, other than the fsck summar

Re: Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-04 Thread E.L. Meijer \(Eric\)
> > I know a maximal mount check is a normal system check but, is there any > percentage of non-contiguous files worrying? Last check I had 1.0% on / and > /opt, and 7.3% on /home. No. A non-contiguous file is a file that is scattered over the disk in more pieces. This happens

Maximal Mount Check

1999-03-03 Thread homega
I know a maximal mount check is a normal system check but, is there any percentage of non-contiguous files worrying? Last check I had 1.0% on / and /opt, and 7.3% on /home. TIA Horacio.