>on Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 05:05:06PM +1100, Marc-Adrian Napoli ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> >on Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 01:18:08AM +0200, Tommi Komulainen >> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 10:03:19AM +1100, Marc-Adrian Napoli wrote: >>> >> > ?---rwS--- 28781 14368 28515 4294967295 Sep 29 1997 >> beta_test.frm > >>>> > >> >> > ive never seen this before! the permissions (and filesizes) are all out >> >> > of whack... >> >> >> >> Looks like a textbook-example of a corrupted filesystem. You need to >> >> it. >> > >> >I'd also check for, or create, comprehensive backups. You'll very >> >likely need them. >> >> we have backups... but i only spotted these after the errors started.... >> >> gonna have to wait till midnight to do a fsck on the 100gig partition, >> bloody hell its gonna take forever ;-)>>>
>Um. I'd have that partition umounted and be fscking it *now*. I'd also >do the first fsck with the no-mods option selected. Might not be a bad >idea to have a (larger) disk to do a raw 'dd' dump of the filesystem -- >if you have to do low-level filesystem forensics, it's far better to do >this on a copy rather than the original data. > >I'd also be strongly inclined to swap the disk and just screw the >restoration on the disk. Particularly if you're dealing with any sort >of business systems. Time is worth more than hardware, and good disks >don't "just go south" (or do you say "go north" down under?). south... i think, ive never actually used that saying before ;-) what is the no-mod option of fsck all about? i dont see it on the man page nor is there an option for it... Regards, Marc-Adrian Napoli Network Admin Connect Infobahn Australia +61 2 9212 0387
