3 ms·
> You were dropped into some stand alone shell after fsck threw up its > hands and it was up to you to fix it. I can't remember how many of my early Linux sys
by bluedino 4y ago
> You were dropped into some stand alone shell after fsck threw up its
> hands and it was up to you to fix it.
I can't remember how many of my early Linux systems I couldn't recover after a power outage (or crash) because / was corrupt
- stingraycharles 4y agoReally? As someone who has been using Linux since the 90s, for me the corruptions were extremely rare. Full fsck of course was happening regularly after unclean shutdowns, but I think I encountered only 1 or 2 actual corruptions.
- mpol 4y agoI had it happen many times as well. A power outage or a thrashing system were often accompanied with an fsck and file loss on ext2. This even included system files like libgtk.so because they were open at the moment of crashing. I never understood why reading/opening a file would corrupt it on a crash. I was happy to switch to Reiserfs.
- jmbwell 4y agoIn my own experience, such situations were more likely when the system was already suffering some other issue or failure, like a failing array member or a volume out of space or something more routine, and in the course of troubleshooting, ah shit, now I have a corrupted root to deal with. Had one app that crashed inexplicably every year at midnight on Halloween. Or at least the two years I put up with it. Had to leave a party to rebuild a server from scratch when one failure turned into lots of failures. Not missing those days!
- jmclnx 4y agoSame here, but I think in those early days, after so many mounts (boots) on ext2, an fsck would execute. I think the number of times was 15.
- okamiueru 4y agoYou can't remember, because it was so long ago?
- wankle 4y agoWindows due to power outage and could not recover, yes. Linux, no. As another poster in the thread, your reported experience does not match the vast majority of reality.