Hello, Most filesystems support destructive operations, with a goal to recover data via some-sort check/repair functionality e.g. btrfs check/rescue, xfs_repair etc.
Some filesystems also require periodic maintenance calls, e.g. something like the `harmless' fsck on each mount. Some filesystems support both destructive recovery and periodic maintainance via fsck interface. However most filesystems in use today, have their own native tooling for destructive recovery and don't need periodic maintenance calls. At the moment stable debian releases configure (well partman, or partman-$foo) mountpoints in /etc/fstab with passno set to 1 or 2, which means run "fsck" in a priority order. This leads to a following chain of events on filesystems that do not require periodic maintenance and only have their own destructive recovery tooling: - d-i sets passno to 1|2 - initramfs-tools includes fsck.$foo scripts - on each boot these are called - $foo-progs packages ship these fsck.$foo scripts - and said fsck.$foo scripts do nothing This is currently the case for xfs and btrfs, which imho is silly. I'm proposing to do following, for filesystems that require no periodic maintainance: - d-i to set passno to 0 - initramfs-tools to not include fsck.$foo tools for passno=0 mountpoints - not spend time on each boot, forking shell scripts that do nothing - $foo-progs packages to stop shipping dummy wrapper scripts fsck.$foo - on upgrade force set passno to zero for filesystems in question - $foo-progs packages to still ship initramfs-tools hooks that include/update initramfs with latest disaster recovery tooling (e.g. btrfs check/rescue, xfs_repair, e2fsck etc.) For the time being this is the plan that I'm hoping to implement for btrfs on debian. But imho this also applies to xfs. If there are other filesystems above plan is appropriate, please let me know. (f2fs comes to mind, but i'm not sure about it) Feedback? Questions? Concerns? -- Regards, Dimitri.
