| 1 |
On Sunday, 17 November 2019 20:35:33 GMT n952162 wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 11/17/19 16:06, Mick wrote: |
| 3 |
> > You keep top-posting and inverting the logical Q/A flow of this thread ... |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > On Sunday, 17 November 2019 12:53:51 GMT n952162 wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> Ah, now I see. Yes, in that respect, that is, if you don't have a |
| 7 |
> >> chance to get /forcefsck written. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Running fsck manually with various options and then trying to recover |
| 10 |
> > various superblock locations could get you farther than simply running |
| 11 |
> > fsck in an accepting fashion. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Have you had any experience with this? I spent days search for that |
| 14 |
> superblock once, even writing a pgm to search for the magic number, |
| 15 |
> after working with dump2fs, and never got anywhere. I'd sure like to |
| 16 |
> hear that somebody had success with it. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Yes, I vaguely remember using it in the past. Some heavy handed user pressed |
| 19 |
the power button, leaving the fs dangling. Through trial & error I found a |
| 20 |
backup superblock listed by dumpe2fs, which worked and allowed the fs to be |
| 21 |
accessed with minimal loss of data. I don't know if this would be the case |
| 22 |
under all eventualities. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Regards, |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Mick |
Archives