On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 10:44:32AM -0500, David Maxwell wrote:
> No. Go read The Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD Operating System.
> 
> The order of filesystem operations allows fsck to correctly recover
> data which would be lost if writes were not performed in an orderly
> fashion. There's a lot of research into this design choice, and I've
> never been pointed at anything similar for EXT2FS. Feel free to tell
> me where to find it.
> 
> i.e. If fsck finds data with no file linked to it, on FFS, it knows the
> file was deleted(unlinked), but on EXT2FS, the file could have been being
> created, or deleted - now what should it do?

Ext2 sets a dtime field in the inode if the file is meant to be deleted.

> 
> > > Try sometimes some bigger disk activity (say, some untarring, deleting)
> > > on Linux and BSD. Hit the power switch in the middle of operation.
> > > Then compare the results on Linux and BSD after the disks are
> > > fscked :)
> > 
> > I usually lose more data on NetBSD - but fsck doesn't even NOTICE
> > all lossage.
> 
> Whose fsck doesn't notice?

fsck_ffs on NetBSD (without softupdates, that is the comparism) compared
to e2fsck on whatever OS you want.

> What doesn't it notice?

File data.

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.