Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: tuxic@××××××.de
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences?
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 13:50:27
Message-Id: 20170331135013.rotvjujqzjpr63pv@solfire
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences? by Nils Freydank
1 On 03/31 10:59, Nils Freydank wrote:
2 > [...]
3 > > The fsck.*'s are built in
4 >
5 > I agree:
6 >
7 > % bb
8 > ~ $ which fsck
9 > ~ $ fsck -v
10 > fsck (busybox 1.26.2, 2017-03-12 11:38:12 CET)
11 >
12 >
13 > --
14 > GPG fingerprint: '00EF D31F 1B60 D5DB ADB8 31C1 C0EC E696 0E54 475B'
15 > Nils Freydank
16
17 Ok, if its builtin then back to the initial question:
18 How does this implementation compares to the "official" stuff of
19 e2fsprogs and friends?
20 Any experiences with that ?
21
22 Thanks a lot for any help in advance!
23
24 Cheers
25 Meino

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] busybox fsck vs. fsck.ext4 ... experiences? Jonathan Callen <jcallen@g.o>