On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 03:36:03PM -0500, J Chapman Flack wrote:
> I noticed that out of the five listed inconsistencies, four of them are
> truly innocuous, in that they won't hurt you badly if you operate the
> filesystem without fscking it.  But "blocks in the free map also in files"
> would hurt,because with further use of the fs you'd wind up with files
> sharing blocks. Does the kernel really allow that? Is the problem that nobody
> wants to sync-update the bitmap so frequently?

At least with soft updates it is supposed to be "blocks in the free map
marked as used, but not in files". That doesn't hurt badly, it is the same
situation as inode count too large.

Joerg