On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 02:15:19AM +0000, Nicholas Vinen wrote:
>
> > Am *I* missing something and you can do this by mounting with the
> > "nocheck" option?? I have a 50GB RAID and I mount it using nocheck, it
> > takes a fraction of a second, without this option it takes about 20
> > seconds to mount.
> > Surely a mount option is better than patching the kernel?
>
> The point is that noone needs the 'check' case, because the checks
> don't check anything vital, and only take a lot of time. So many
> clueless people wait much longer than they'd need to.
>
> The check isn't necessary, because the 'clean' flag is still there and
> if your system crashes, e2fsck will do the checking job. No need to
> check the counts on every mount.
Hmm, well I have had the check find some problems in the past. However
I mess with my system a lot and the corruption was probably my fault. Most
people wouldn't have this problem. Nobody likes a mounted corrupt
filesystem however.
>
> --
> Vojtech Pavlik
> SuSE Labs
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:30 EST