| 1 |
On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 12:05 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: |
| 2 |
> In the course of trying to get X to work on my ASUS 1005HA netbook, |
| 3 |
> I had to power the machine off several times. In the course of this, |
| 4 |
> some damage seems to have occurred to the file system. |
| 5 |
> There are files in /var /tmp which I can't remove: |
| 6 |
> the msg is "EXT2-fs error: ext2_lookup: deleted inode referenced: 16388". |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I got round the problem by creating new dirs, copying everything else |
| 9 |
> & renaming the dirs, but that leaves me with /bad1 , which I can't remove |
| 10 |
> as it contains a reference to an inode which no longer exists. |
| 11 |
> NB this is not the more common problem of a bad file name, |
| 12 |
> which cb dealt with simply by removing the inode (which still exists). |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Can anyone help ? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> BTW is Ext2 the best fs for this machine ? Might Ext3 or Ext4 be better ? |
| 17 |
> -- I use Reiserfs on my desktop machines. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Have you tried fsk on it? - "man e2fsck" |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The last question is a bit of a "how long is a piece of string" |
| 24 |
question. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
My personal experience is ext2 is only for those occasions you dont |
| 27 |
value the data at all :) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
ext3 isnt much better unless you use "data=journal" to get some basic |
| 30 |
protection. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
But instead of fiddling with such (deleted disparaging comment) file |
| 33 |
systems, use reiserfs though this may need a complete reinstall . |
| 34 |
Updates are still occuring to the reiserfs code in the kernel, so |
| 35 |
reiserfs is not abandoned by any means. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
ext4, reiserfs4, btfs and the like are too new for me, though I like the |
| 38 |
look of btfs. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I have read some interesting articles in the past about the ext |
| 41 |
filesystem devs and their inside track on rieserfs in the kernel and the |
| 42 |
war of words that surrounds it. My personal experience with ext2/3 |
| 43 |
supports the view that the ext filesystems didn't fairly win the |
| 44 |
argument based on performance and data protection. Enough said. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Unfortunately, filesystems are a very complex and emotive subject with |
| 47 |
no one choice fits all solution. My suggestion is you have lost data |
| 48 |
and have problems with what you are using ... time to move on, try ext3 |
| 49 |
(with "data=journal") next - because you can fix ext2 with e2fsck |
| 50 |
(though probably lose some data in the process, but ...), convert to |
| 51 |
ext3 then mount with "data=journal" without having to reinstall. Google |
| 52 |
for the commands needed ... worked for me. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Have fun :) |
| 55 |
BillK |
Archives