regular fsck runs are too disturbing

uiring a reboot and full system check on boot-up. Regards, Waldemar Kornewald -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

On 9/27/07, Erik Andrén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2007/9/27, Waldemar Kornewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > ... > > -- > > Are there any alternatives? Here are two examples: > > > > Use SMART (AFAIK, Vista does that). > > SMART is hard

Re: Activate Desktop-Effects: Yes/No-Button?

ask the user and let those who want to disable Compiz just do that. I hope this will some day become a philosophy in the open-source world (it's only a small, but important step towards better usability). Ideally, we'd only be presented with *essential* choice and then have something

Re: Activate Desktop-Effects: Yes/No-Button?

Was my mail cut in the middle? On 9/27/07, Waldemar Kornewald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, (resending... why do mails not get to the ML, automatically?) > > On 9/27/07, Dominik Wagenfuehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > PS: And yes, I know that you can deactiva

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

On 9/27/07, Luke Yelavich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 06:03:32PM EST, Waldemar Kornewald wrote: > > Isn't a hardware defect the main reason a file system can be corrupted > > without a crash? There can be serious FS bugs, but aren't those v

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

Hi, On 9/27/07, Oliver Grawert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Donnerstag, den 27.09.2007, 10:49 +0200 schrieb Waldemar Kornewald: > > What about my alternative suggestion? It would still run fsck, but at > > the same time be less annoying or not disturbing at all. > n

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

se that particular behavior (fsck every 21st or 30th boot), anyway? IMHO, a much more accurate measurement would be: how much time has the FS spent in the "mounted" state since the last FS check? Regards, Waldemar Kornewald -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.u

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

medium load. FYI, in Germany, for example, we have multiple power plants running solely to keep electronic devices in standby mode! Regards, Waldemar Kornewald -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

n't do anything about it. There are two solutions that work for everyone: turn fsck off by default or make it work in the background. Regards, Waldemar Kornewald -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

technical > stops you to _check_ a drive while being mounted r/w. In the > (hopefully rare) case you find some issue you'd have to ask the user > to take action, i.e. reboot the machine. Exactly! Regards, Waldemar Kornewald -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@li

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing

s and the user experience the solution would be very simple: Either it's implemented correctly or not at all. Regards, Waldemar Kornewald -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss

Re: regular fsck runs are too disturbing - and current approach does not work very well in detecting defects!

h to that tool (running in background)? Thanks. Regards, Waldemar Kornewald -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss