| 1 |
On Sunday 25 July 2010 06:57:43 KH wrote: |
| 2 |
> > You said you ran e2fsck and it was OK. What was the command? |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Normally with an e2fsck on a journalled fs, the app will replay the |
| 7 |
> > journal and make a few minor checks. This takes about 4 seconds, not |
| 8 |
> > the 40 minutes it takes to do a ful ext2 check. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > I think you might need to fsck without the journal. I know there's a way |
| 13 |
> > to do this but a cursory glance at the man page didn't reveal it. Maybe |
| 14 |
> > an ext user will chip in with the correct method |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Hi, |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I ran on the two partitions e2fsck /dev/sde3 as well as fsck.ext3 |
| 23 |
> /dev/sde3 . Yes, it only took some seconds. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
It's been a long time since I used ext3 so some of this might be wrong. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
An fsck that takes a few seconds is using the journal, which might not uncover |
| 28 |
deeper corruption. You should try disabling the journal (I couldn't find the |
| 29 |
way to do that though), but this will also work: |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Boot of a LiveCD, mount your root partition somewhere using type "ext2" and |
| 32 |
fsck it. This will invalidate the journal but that's OK, it gets recreated on |
| 33 |
the next proper boot. Let the fsck finish - it will take a while on a large |
| 34 |
fs. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
When done, reboot as normal and see if the machine boots up properly. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives