Karl Larsen wrote:
> Mike Bird wrote:
>  
>> On Sun May 18 2008 11:23:02 Karl Larsen wrote:
>>  
>>  
>>>   Well Mike the system does fsck every so often and there is no -f in
>>> fsck. So I really think what we have is a tiny orphan inode that happens
>>> when you bring the ext3 file system down wrong, I do not see this making
>>> the change from 6 to 2 Gb.
>>>  
>>>    
>> Karl,
>>
>> There may not be a -f in "man fsck" but the fsck command supports -f
>> as you could very easily have verified before posting false information
>> to this list.
>>
>>   # umount /dev/md0
>>   # fsck /dev/md0
>>   fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>>   e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>>   /boot: clean, 48/48192 files, 43504/96256 blocks
>>   # fsck -f /dev/md0
>>   fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>>   e2fsck 1.40.8 (13-Mar-2008)
>>   Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
>>   Pass 2: Checking directory structure
>>   Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity
>>   Pass 4: Checking reference counts
>>   Pass 5: Checking group summary information
>>   /boot: 48/48192 files (20.8% non-contiguous), 43504/96256 blocks
>>   # mount /dev/md0
>>   #
>>
>> A few options are deliberately omitted from man pages so that newbies
>> don't play with dangerous features unless recommended.
>>
>> An inode is small but data blocks are attached to inodes. Some data
>> blocks may be directories, containing links to more orphaned inodes
>> and more data blocks. It's very easy to get 3GB of lost space. At
>> the moment you don't even know how many orphaned inodes you have,
>> as dumpe2fs only tells you the first.
>>
>> There is at least one other possible place where the lost space could
>> be, but please run fsck or else stop wasting people's time on this list.
>>
>> --Mike Bird
>>
>>  
>>  
>   Mike I did the stupid thing. I read the paper man fsck and there is
> no -f explained there. That is why I was not sure you were right. I will
> run fsck and see what effect it has.
>
> Karl
>
>
>  
  To run fsck I had to come up in a rescue cd which is the 7.10
LiveCD. There I got a terminal and did sudo fsck /dev/hda8 which eneded
quick saying all was well. Then I did the sudo fsck -f /dev/hda8 and
that took much longer but wound up at the same spot. So now back on
/dev/hda8 and df has the same results I have sent several times. The
effect of running fsck both ways was nothing I can measure.

Karl


--

 Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
 Linux User
 #450462  http://counter.li.org.
 PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@(protected)
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users