On Wednesday 09 June 2004 10:59 am, Alvin Oga wrote:
> > It isn't mounted normally. It isn't mounted before fscking it.
>
> good... but i'd add the umount to the script, just to make sure
> nothing breaks
We, I guess yes, that's not a bad plan, just in case. Instead of relying
on the previ
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:51:51PM -0400, Silvan wrote:
> I'm wondering if I'm missing the point of something somehow.
>
> I have a script that fscks hdb, then mounts it and makes a backup of hda. I
> run this as a nightly cron job, and it mails me a report every morning.
>
> The associated bit
hi ya silvan
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Silvan wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 June 2004 09:06 pm, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> That's 'cuz it's fsck, not fdisk. :P
aint it fun, dumb of me, to look at the man pages of fdisk and talk about
e2fsck :-) .. had a good night sleep afterward tho
> So I should swap fsck
Silvan wrote:
>
> So I'm thinking it's some side effect of running fsck inside that if
> statement like that.
Nope.
> I'd like the technical explanation for what and why. It doesn't seem
> to actually have any adverse effect, but it's mildly annoying.
The technical explanation is:
man e2fsck
On Tuesday 08 June 2004 09:06 pm, Alvin Oga wrote:
> > if ! (fsck -n /dev/hdb2); then
>
> - i've never seen the -n option for fdisk ..
That's 'cuz it's fsck, not fdisk. :P
Ah. Actually, you could be onto something there. I call fsck in the script,
relying on it to pass on control to e2fsck,
5 matches
Mail list logo
