On 08/12/14 01:29, The Wanderer wrote:
If that results in you shooting yourself in the foot over the long term,
then that's your problem, because you made the decision to prioritize
the immediate benefit of cancelling the fsck over the long-term benefit
of letting it run.
My experience of running Linux on my personal local interactive (rather
than server) systems over the past eighteen years leads me to believe
that the long-term benefit of *prophylactic* fsck invocations triggered
by mount-count or interval-since-check is approximately zero, since
*those* invocations of fsck have never discovered FS corruption on my
systems.
I mean, sure, I've *had* filesystem corruption on my personal local
interactive Linux systems - but it was always in a scenario of "hardware
failure" or "unclean shutdown".
Other people's experience may, of course, be different.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54858da7.4020...@zen.co.uk
