I'd just like to point out that it seems to take 40 minutes to scan a 500 GB volume!
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 11:05 +0200, Vincenzo Ciancia wrote: > On 27/09/2007 Oliver Grawert wrote: > > > What about my alternative suggestion? It would still run fsck, but at > > > > the same time be less annoying or not disturbing at all. > > not wsure if you ever ran fsck manually, but you have to unmount the > > partition you check or at least mount it readonly ... > > > > so no matter how far you will background it you wont be able to work > > while it runs ... > > If the point of running that (annoying, indeed) fsck is to check for > disk defect, why not running "badblocks" instead? It can do a read-only > check on a mounted filesystem. You could modify that so that it runs > only when other processes are not accessing the disk. In any case, > having a journaled filesystem by default and blocking users while they > might be in a hurry is not pleasant. At least leave the possibility of > interrupting the check. Suppose you are at a conference, and it starts > checking your disk, and you start your talk late for that reason. What > will other people think about ubuntu? Is this good publicity? > > Vincenzo >
-- 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
