Re: ext3 corruption

["Molle Bestefich" <molle.bestefich@gmail.com>]

Duane Griffin wrote:
> > If it doesn't take into account own changes, then the -n command is
> > unable to produce even a slightly accurate resemblence of what would
> > happen if I did a real run.
>
> It takes into account some of them (such as reading data from the
> backup superblock if it detects corruption). Others will be irrelevent
> for further operations. Many reports will be accurate, especially
> fatal ones. I consider that useful, YMMV.

I've attached the output of a -n run, let's get some facts on the table.

I would be very happy if someone knowledgeable would tell me something
useful about it.

I'm especially worried about the "70058 files, 39754 blocks used (0%)"
message at the end of the e2fsck run.

Attachment: fs_check_out.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data