rick@ut-emx.UUCP (Rick Watson) (05/12/89)
Why doesn't fsck think my disks were "unmounted cleanly" when I switch between Ultrix 2.2 and 3.0? I'm shutting down with "/etc/shutdown -h now". This doesn't occur if I reboot the system that was running. Is there a workaround? Is there something dangerous happening that I should know about? Rick Watson University of Texas Computation Center arpa: watson@utadnx.cc.utexas.edu (128.83.1.26) uucp: ...cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!rick bitnet: watson@utadnx span: utspan::watson (UTSPAN is 25.128) phone: 512/471-8220 512/471-3241
thomas@mipsbx.dec.com (Matt Thomas) (05/12/89)
> Why doesn't fsck think my disks were "unmounted cleanly" when I > switch between Ultrix 2.2 and 3.0? I'm shutting down with > "/etc/shutdown -h now". This doesn't occur if I reboot the system > that was running. In each release of Ultrix, the kernel and fsck share a magic number that indicated whether a file system has been unmounted cleanly. This magic number is different for each release of Ultrix. Actually this number changes fairly often (like each baselevel) during the development of a release. The reason for the changing of the number is that each baselevel makes certain assumptions about the consistency of filesystem. The only way to insure consistency to make sure fsck and the kernel are built at the time and they are at the same revision level. -- Matt Thomas Internet: thomas@decwrl.dec.com DECnet-Ultrix Development UUCP: ...!decwrl!thomas Digital Equipment Corporation Disclaimer: This message reflects my own Littleton, MA warped views, etc.
grr@cbmvax.UUCP (George Robbins) (05/12/89)
In article <12982@ut-emx.UUCP> rick@ut-emx.UUCP (Rick Watson) writes: > Why doesn't fsck think my disks were "unmounted cleanly" when I > switch between Ultrix 2.2 and 3.0? I'm shutting down with > "/etc/shutdown -h now". This doesn't occur if I reboot the system > that was running. The story present a while back was that the "dirty" flag was changed for compatibility with the 4.3BSD "dirty" flag, to preserve filesystem interchangability. I don't know if this is precisely true, however the release notes do warn about the situation. > Is there a workaround? Is there something dangerous happening that > I should know about? Nothing dangerous is happening. If you are confident that your filesystems are not corrupt then go ahead and do a "mount -o force ..." or let the fsck run each time. Do let it fsck once in a while for luck and job security. Once you stablize on 3.0, the problem will go away. -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing arpa: cbmvax!grr@uunet.uu.net Commodore, Engineering Department fone: 215-431-9255 (only by moonlite)