Baslinux mailing list

[baslinux AT lists.ibiblio.org]

On Sat, 29 Mar 2008, Steven wrote:

> I find it hard to believe that /etc/check-fs is not 
> there.  Execute the following from the command line:

I can send you a screenshot if that will help convince you. I've just 
double checked and I can assure you it isn't there.

> -------------------
> touch /etc/check-fs
> -------------------
> Is it there now?  If it works now, why wouldn't it
> work in /etc/rc?

Yes, it's there after touch'ing. I have no idea why it wouldn't work from 
the rc file--that's more your area of expertise than mine. Didn't you say 
you've been using this method yourself for some time?

> Are those lines from your /etc/rc, EXACTLY as you
> have given them?  If so, they are wrong.  Where is
> the e2fsck part?

Yes, exactly as I have given them. You mean where is the e2fsck part that, 
in a fresh BL 3 install follows the swapon entry? If that's what you mean, 
it's still in that same place. Only I commented it out on the assumption 
that this is what makes e2fsck run on every boot. I understood what you 
were offering was a replacement for this unwanted behavior and should 
essentially take the place of the existing e2fsck routine. If I'm wrong 
about that, I would appreciate a fuller explanation and more complete 
examples of what to change and how to change it. Please bear in mind that 
my conversance in bash is quite limited--probably more limited than you 
would imagine.

> That line is also wrong.  Moreover, you shouldn't
> even be trying that method until the earlier method
> is working.

I only discovered it wasn't working when I happened to be rooting around 
in the /etc directory this morning in a moment that happened to coincide 
with a recollection that it should be there (I don't typically go around 
preoccupied with concerns about whether I have the right files in my /etc 
directory). Again, I thought that you had offered a tried and true method 
for making e2fsck run only after an unclean shutdown (you said "Yes, that 
is still the method I use.  It works well": the post describing how to 
modify the way e2fsck runs was made over a year ago, btw, giving the 
impression that the technique had been in operation for some time).

> When you asked about the counting method, I assumed
> you had already got the "dirty shutdown" method
> working.

I assumed I didn't need to do any troubleshooting for it to work. It was 
not offered as a tentative solution, but as one that was "production 
ready."

> Silly me.

Ummmmmm . . . no comment :)

James