* fsck silently exits when fstype-specific fsck is not found
@ 2020-12-29 19:18 Chris Hofstaedtler
2021-01-05 12:07 ` Karel Zak
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Chris Hofstaedtler @ 2020-12-29 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: util-linux
Hi,
I just noticed that fsck, when given a single device name, silently
exits when it cannot find an appropriate fsck.%s program.
Example:
(/dev/sda1 is an EFI System Partition, so type=vfat)
# fsck -V /dev/sda1
fsck from util-linux 2.36.1
# echo $?
0
Note that it also does not warn about fsck.vfat not being found or
anything really.
This appears because fsck.c has a "really_wanted" list of fstypes;
anything not in there gets the mentioned behaviour.
I find this to be very surprising. What are the reasons for this?
I could try changing this code path, but I'm not sure if this is
expected in the first place?
Thanks,
Chris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: fsck silently exits when fstype-specific fsck is not found
2020-12-29 19:18 fsck silently exits when fstype-specific fsck is not found Chris Hofstaedtler
@ 2021-01-05 12:07 ` Karel Zak
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Karel Zak @ 2021-01-05 12:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Hofstaedtler; +Cc: util-linux
On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 08:18:14PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just noticed that fsck, when given a single device name, silently
> exits when it cannot find an appropriate fsck.%s program.
>
> Example:
> (/dev/sda1 is an EFI System Partition, so type=vfat)
> # fsck -V /dev/sda1
> fsck from util-linux 2.36.1
> # echo $?
> 0
>
> Note that it also does not warn about fsck.vfat not being found or
> anything really.
>
> This appears because fsck.c has a "really_wanted" list of fstypes;
> anything not in there gets the mentioned behaviour.
>
> I find this to be very surprising. What are the reasons for this?
I guess to avoid unnecessary warnings on systems with filesystems
where fsck is not (or wasn't) implemented like btrfs or xfs.
> I could try changing this code path, but I'm not sure if this is
> expected in the first place?
Maybe we can introduce some another list of filesystems where fsck is
optional and recommended, but it's no error when not available -- it
means print warning, but do not exit with an error.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-05 12:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-12-29 19:18 fsck silently exits when fstype-specific fsck is not found Chris Hofstaedtler
2021-01-05 12:07 ` Karel Zak
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.