Hi, I don't use a tmpfs, because the data that is stored there is still useful to have, and preferably should not be lost. If it happens, alright, but in the best possible case it should be present. On Thu Feb 13, 2020 at 8:22 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> "Xogium" <[email protected]> schrieb am 12.02.2020 um 19:19 in Nachricht > <20538_1581532274_5E444471_20538_1493_1_C0KE5IL8FV0W.1GJ93L5AHSABJ@dragonstone>: > > > > Hi, > > I am wondering about how to best implement a mechanism to recreate a > > specific > > filesystem in case of the slightest data corruption done to it. From what I > > > > read > > in systemd‑makefs manpage, the tool will not trigger if it can detect that a > > > > filesystem is already present. However I'm thinking that in some case, the > > data > > can get corrupted, yet the filesystem still is reported as ext4 to makefs. > > Perhaps I understood wrong, in which case, could I somehow order > > systemd‑makefs > > to be ran only if either systemd‑fsck fails, or if mounting fails ? This > > filesystem can easily get corrupted due to power loss, and isn't important > > for > > the entire system to work, however it would be nicer if this could be > > detected > > and delt with accordingly. > > > So why don't you use a tmpfs if the data can be lost anytime? > > > > > > Thanks ! > > _______________________________________________ > > systemd‑devel mailing list > > systemd‑[email protected] > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd‑devel > > > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
