From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id E050EE010DC; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:47:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (b.hutchman[at]gmail.com) * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature * -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no * trust * [209.85.161.180 listed in list.dnswl.org] Received: from mail-yw0-f180.google.com (mail-yw0-f180.google.com [209.85.161.180]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF3A9E00874 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-f180.google.com with SMTP id u134so183876690ywg.3 for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2016 13:47:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=7fjRd591sQrTWtWck/yme/u6//huhQ/8ROYajG6Esfc=; b=SpFfko163CrRkgMH/7Te/LSsV3j/vbQtBO7rJ3bR9Peylq8ifY5UsWmmhgWKhHGPyA 34EE5KhWk6AnpwCz/VdLyNcGJSOuc+w3UMwLhOZ8sQCWvx4tTmWbN+zQ0coOyIfXi6kK y6xAoPbbjYN57iH/1Daw0GWFtNYHQmyE+wx20K9DI1i1yX5YwaEtih5fU99jmdUSFyLM KZCX6FnQwvgNE+BFAzOqNnf/dME4kug5WE57B2F8qjuBBC9CY4SajGWmzC4NATk851St kO26XnfypUEjfkr5qfAaOB4xo2eUKeNplaZyOJ/wZQ6dK4BiAMX1ShNtsQree8iK3td3 ai6w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=7fjRd591sQrTWtWck/yme/u6//huhQ/8ROYajG6Esfc=; b=CZbfdjHoLLESi3rmrFZAlalaKV5HcW9Lg3FsWtG+GDl8vuhjZBhwxlJwh9Ig1VyYo9 8LjBVMm1Uva+3cDuLfIYBkC9ibKy7ACFbiBn/ps/akGw10gkNsYxnWUGbHoKrTQa7Nvj wp+XZt/2lcpyYiJ+5zMDK+3qNF9gom3K0BdGK0QbQl/CngcjLSQEDCF1/7loiS3Inf2E Wri4wDW8GhCIJG3um13xJrzlEAJ4YIQVZw3GN+pmhF278bTgKEcw+HtB2J7onm4yUt/F 5IM0Cz3RQvstDkWpCFa5XW5EUMk2KYJRt9LCOwE/5I4vNbvA1NWLHlH9Y7aH9F8ErNjt rfWw== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouv+UQO6dhYLI98kjdmmDXZjbDMiB+LZzor1DxEnosiIkbp8zT/ictxQoOOcW9QNiHiDH+Hu3IOtvHmQRw== X-Received: by 10.37.104.20 with SMTP id d20mr46299936ybc.59.1470084472694; Mon, 01 Aug 2016 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.130.134 with HTTP; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Brian Hutchinson Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 16:47:52 -0400 Message-ID: To: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: Yocto 1.8.1 - Insert USB VFAT thumb drive results in "Volume was not properly unmounted. Some data may be corrupt. Please run fsck" X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2016 20:47:56 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Brian Hutchinson wrote: >> dosfsck 2.11, 12 Mar 2005, FAT32, LFN >> Starting check/repair pass. >> Starting verification pass. >> /dev/sdb1: 284 files, 60465/62894 clusters > > Another update. After seeing guys on the Raspberry Pi forums > complaining about a similar thing they hinted that dosfstools was tool > old. Sure enough, I ran fsck.fat on the USB drive from my Ubuntu > machine and it came back with: > > $ sudo fsck.fat -a /dev/sdg1 > fsck.fat 3.0.26 (2014-03-07) > 0x25: Dirty bit is set. Fs was not properly unmounted and some data > may be corrupt. > Automatically removing dirty bit. > Performing changes. > /dev/sdg1: 142 files, 60465/62894 clusters > > > ... and now the USB drive mounts without complaint but I modified my > box with a mount.sh from a previous release trying to get to the > bottom of what was going on. Now I need to put everything back the > way it was (restore mount.sh from 1.8.1) and see if it is still a > problem. > > My kernel had the USB-persist feature turned on when I first noticed > the problem so I'm not sure if left over files (not quite sure how the > feature keeps track of things) from that could cause problems. I restored the original version of /etc/udev/scripts/mount.sh and now that I've cleared the "dirty bit" with the newer version of fsck.fat on my Ubuntu box ... inserting the USB drive works but it is mounted in /run/media/sdb1. What's up with this run directory? Is this some new convention that is to be preferred over the previous mount point which before was /media/sdb1??? Regards, Brian