On Tue, 1 May 2007, Juan RP wrote:

> You are not wrong. Do you mean that the offset value reported by
> scan_ffs, will be off by 16?
>
> Or are you talking about the sector number for the superblock?

Oh, no, I expect the number it reports for the beginning of the partition 
is correct, I have no reason to think otherwise.

For Marcin's problem, however, the beginning of the partition is not the 
interesting number; afaict he hasn't clobbered his disklabel, only the 
first superblock.  So he will have to add 16 to the result scan_ffs gives 
him to find the sector address of the second superblock, the NN he needs 
to give to "fsck_lfs -b $NN".

Take care,
 						Konrad Schroder
 						perseant@hhhh.org