Ian Smith wrote: > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Chris wrote: > > If its bad to run fsck on a mounted read,write then why does > > background fsck do it? or you talking about foreground fsck only? > > Well I was referring to foreground fsck, and I still don't know why > running it on a mounted fs is 'bad' when fsck runs in 'NO WRITE' mode > anyway when it finds a fs is mounted, hence my query above.
Here's my understanding: Mounted fs (rw) isn't in stable state, there may be some writes to it - daemons, buffers flushes, etc. In this condition fsck can report inconsistency. And fsck running in 'NO WRITE' won't help anyway :) Cheers, Karol -- Karol Kwiatkowski <karol.kwiat at gmail dot com> OpenPGP 0x06E09309
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
