Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Partition\s+un$mount\|repairable$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Partition\s+un$mount\|repairable$\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. Oracle install -- fixed? (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 14:30:26 +0100; some days ago one of our systems crashed due to a defective CPU cooler. The XFS filesystem on it now is unmountable and unrepairable: .... imap claims in-use inode 686650 is free, correcting imap im; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg00267.html (7,941 bytes)
2. & LVM to coexist happily (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:31:41 +1100; hi there, Yes, this one seems to keep reappearing for some reason. I have had a quick look at the repair code - its fairly hairy and I'd really need a filesystem which exhibits the problem to try and; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg00285.html (9,290 bytes)
3. attr (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:43:08 +1100; Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? There have been worrying reports of data corruption over the last few weeks, and I am sure the developers are tryin; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg00341.html (8,797 bytes)
4. e some pagebuf debug code (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:37:33 -0600; Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? Not as yet, but there have now been two cases of filesystems ending up confusing repair like this. There have been; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg00345.html (9,898 bytes)
5. (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxx; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 19:50:32 +1000; In my time running Linux/Win? I have had corruption or major issues with most of the filesystems at some time or other. I still trust XFS as I know where it falls down for me. Of course YMMV. My This; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg00355.html (10,045 bytes)
6. upprt_prune assertion fix (score: 1): Author: o@xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 07:18:58 -0600; Adrian Head wrote: On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 13:37, Stephen Lord wrote: Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? Not as yet, but there have now been two cases of; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg00358.html (12,020 bytes)
7. KE - fix xfs module build (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 19:07:47 +0100; Yup, unfortunately I must confirm this. It turned out that the RAID itself delivers corrupt data, and that it's not a filesystem issue. We've already ordered a new cable to make sure it's not a cabli; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg00377.html (8,695 bytes)
8. 't boot 2.4.17 (was Re: GRUB + LVM + XFS?) (score: 1): Author: <stimits@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 14:30:26 +0100; some days ago one of our systems crashed due to a defective CPU cooler. The XFS filesystem on it now is unmountable and unrepairable: .... imap claims in-use inode 686650 is free, correcting imap im; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg01196.html (7,941 bytes)
9. happily (score: 1): Author: een <sandeen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:31:41 +1100; hi there, Yes, this one seems to keep reappearing for some reason. I have had a quick look at the repair code - its fairly hairy and I'd really need a filesystem which exhibits the problem to try and; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg01214.html (9,290 bytes)
10. TAKE - Workaround for gcc 2.96 bug (score: 1): Author: <a.haakmat@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:43:08 +1100; Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? There have been worrying reports of data corruption over the last few weeks, and I am sure the developers are tryin; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg01270.html (8,797 bytes)
11. out ACL code (score: 1): Author: ve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:37:33 -0600; Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? Not as yet, but there have now been two cases of filesystems ending up confusing repair like this. There have been; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg01274.html (9,898 bytes)
12. cent - was: vmware+XFS+duron+viakt133 - works? (score: 1): Author: zyk <olaf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 19:50:32 +1000; In my time running Linux/Win? I have had corruption or major issues with most of the filesystems at some time or other. I still trust XFS as I know where it falls down for me. Of course YMMV. My This; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg01284.html (10,045 bytes)
13. : Oops with 2.4.16 (score: 1): Author: entonza <matteo@xxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 07:18:58 -0600; Adrian Head wrote: On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 13:37, Stephen Lord wrote: Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? Not as yet, but there have now been two cases of; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg01287.html (12,020 bytes)
14. do in brooklyn when your filesystem is dead (score: 1): Author: eve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 19:07:47 +0100; Yup, unfortunately I must confirm this. It turned out that the RAID itself delivers corrupt data, and that it's not a filesystem issue. We've already ordered a new cable to make sure it's not a cabli; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg01306.html (8,695 bytes)
15. Partition un(mount|repairable) (score: 1): Author: Deti Fliegl <fliegl@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 14:30:26 +0100; Hi some days ago one of our systems crashed due to a defective CPU cooler. The XFS filesystem on it now is unmountable and unrepairable: .... imap claims in-use inode 686650 is free, correcting imap; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg02125.html (7,941 bytes)
16. Re: Partition un(mount|repairable) (score: 1): Author: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:31:41 +1100; hi there, Yes, this one seems to keep reappearing for some reason. I have had a quick look at the repair code - its fairly hairy and I'd really need a filesystem which exhibits the problem to try and; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg02143.html (9,382 bytes)
17. Re: Partition un(mount|repairable) (score: 1): Author: Jason White <jasonjgw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 12:43:08 +1100; Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? There have been worrying reports of data corruption over the last few weeks, and I am sure the developers are tryin; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg02199.html (8,847 bytes)
18. Re: Partition un(mount|repairable) (score: 1): Author: Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:37:33 -0600; Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? Not as yet, but there have now been two cases of filesystems ending up confusing repair like this. There have been; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg02203.html (9,886 bytes)
19. Re: Partition un(mount|repairable) (score: 1): Author: Adrian Head <ahead@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 19:50:32 +1000; In my time running Linux/Win? I have had corruption or major issues with most of the filesystems at some time or other. I still trust XFS as I know where it falls down for me. Of course YMMV. My This; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg02213.html (10,151 bytes)
20. Re: Partition un(mount|repairable) (score: 1): Author: Stephen Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 07:18:58 -0600; Any suggestions as to how the damage was done in the first place - what the bug is? Not as yet, but there have now been two cases of filesystems ending up confusing repair like this. There have been; /archives/xfs/2002-01/msg02216.html (12,348 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]