On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 04:38:29AM +0000, Russell G. Howe wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:48:15PM +1100, Nathan Scott wrote:
> (and yes, I know xfs_repair says near the end that nblocks is 0, but
> xfs_db definately reported setting it to 189764)
> As an example of how the filesystem behaves:
> [rhowe@gonzo] ~ $
> Connection to gonzo.sfarc.net closed.
> [root@xiao] ~ # cd /var
> [root@xiao] /var # ls
> [kernel message]
> Filesystem "ide1(22,67)": corrupt dinode 2222, extent total = 2, nblocks
> = 0, Unmount and run xfs_repair
> [return to our regularly scheduled prompt]
> ls: Scarface.avi: Unknown error 990
> account cache local log.nmbd mail run www
> autofs games lock log.smbd oldlost+found spool
> backups lib log lost+found rhowe tmp
> [root@xiao] /var # ls rhowe
> ls: rhowe/Scarface.avi: Unknown error 990
> (this is accompanied by a similar kernel error to the one above, but
> with 6296608 as the dinode number.)
> I don't need the /var/rhowe directory at all, as soon as I can fix this
> filesystem, I will be rm'ing it.
> > > I don't need the file referenced by inode 2222, so losing it is of no
> > > consequence. I'd actually forgotten about its existence!
> > Is inode 6296608 a copy of this file? (seem to have the same size
> > and both seem to be corrupted in the same way ...strange).
> No idea. How could I find out?
Can you run the same (first) xfs_db command I sent to print
out the inode, except change the 2222 to 6296608? I wonder
if these two inodes are pointing at the same extents...
> Maybe I was playing with hard links or
> something? (although I don't remember doing so...)
No, a hard link would be two distinct directory entries with
the same inode number - not quite the same as what we have