Re: ext3 issue..

From: Lennart Sorensen
Date: Fri Apr 29 2005 - 08:24:18 EST

On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 09:35:09PM -0500, Davy Durham wrote:
> Well, I don't have the output of the fsck when I did the machine I did
> it on. And I can't do it on the production machine right now. Perhaps I
> can tommorrow if I can talk to the guys about cleaning it off. I'm a
> bit afraid to do it, reason being that if it's off on this accounting
> information, what files/data might I lose if I did an fsck on it
> (remember, the one I already did it on was empty).
> Also, I did an "e2fsck /home" on the running machine just expecting to
> get the "warning, don't do this on a mounted file system" prompt, but
> instead I got:
> # e2fsck /home
> e2fsck 1.34 (25-Jul-2003)
> e2fsck: Is a directory while trying to open /home

/home IS a directory. You run fsck on the device NOT the mount point.
Remember the filesystem is unmounted or at most mounted readonly when
fsck is run after all.

> The superblock could not be read or does not describe a correct ext2
> filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2
> filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the superblock
> is corrupt, and you might try running e2fsck with an alternate superblock:
> e2fsck -b 8193 <device>
> Perhaps it's because it is mounted? (and -b 8193 didn't change
> anything). Do I need to do it on the device after unmounting instead?
> (Probably so)
> I do get the expected warning with fsck itself. Which should I be
> using? e2fsck or fsck?

Shouldn't matter as far as I know. If ext3, perhaps fsck.ext3 is right.
fsck should just figure it out I believe.

> This is kernel-2.6.3-15mdk BTW (mdk 10.0official)
> I'll try to report back tomorrow if I'm able to do anything..

Len Sorensen
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at