On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
>
> > I didn't have time to check the patches yet but wasn't the Vista problem due
> > to a bug in libntfs and not because of ntfsresize?
>
> The problem is that with my first patch which does not turn on unmounting
> you end up with an ntfsresize that is horrible:
Another ntfsresize design rule was that it doesn't make __ANY__
modification to NTFS until it checked and analyzed the volume and it found
to be consistent and safe for resizing. This is very important. It's even
explicitely written in the error messages when corrupt volumes are detected
which happen relatively often:
NTFS is inconsistent. Run chkdsk /f on Windows then reboot it TWICE!
The usage of the /f parameter is very IMPORTANT! No modification was
and will be made to NTFS by this software until it gets repaired.
A lot of softwares, drivers corrupt NTFS and this is a very strong
argument for self-protection that it was not ntfsresize which corrupted it
because it was already damaged when user wanted to do the resizing.
> Please take the time to review the patches...
Surely I would but I don't have much free time recently, and unfortunately
it doesn't help that seemingly you have checked in your entire private
ntfsprogs CVS in one commmit.
To be honest, I still can't even see what the problem was. You wrote the
journal wasn't emptied. But ntfsresize explicitely does that. Which
function became conditional. And perhaps the problem is that that the clean
journal detection is broken for Vista. For example, because of journal
format change.
I have checked the ntfsresize journal reset again, without your latest
patches. After the resize:
ntfscat -fi 2 /dev/hda1 | hexdump
00000000 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff
*
02a04000
So, the journal has been reset, entirely. You say that this is not the case
for Vista?
Szaka
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
