*BSD News Article 39179


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!werple.apana.org.au!otis.apana.org.au!serval.net.wsu.edu!netnews.nwnet.net!reuter.cse.ogi.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!caen!usenet.coe.montana.edu!bsd.coe.montana.edu!nate
From: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs
Subject: Re: Sharing partitions between FreeBSD 1.1.5.1 and 2.0
Date: 8 Dec 1994 17:19:48 GMT
Organization: Montana State University, Bozeman  Montana
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <3c7f7k$cue@pdq.coe.montana.edu>
References: <D0Hy2E.2E9@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bsd.coe.montana.edu

In article <D0Hy2E.2E9@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>,
Richard Tobin <richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>I'm sure this must have already been asked, but I guess it must have
>expired :-(
>
>I have both FreeBSD 1.1.5.1 and 2.0 installed on my machine, and plan
>to continue using both for a while.  I'm using the old-style
>filesystems so that both versions can use them.  If I boot 1.1.5.1
>after 2.0, fsck says:
>
>  BAD SUPER BLOCK: VALUES IN SUPERBLOCK DISAGREE WITH THOSE IN
>  FIRST ALTERNATE
>
>If I run fsck by hand, it happily uses the values in the alternate
>block (32).
>
>I guess that this is because of the clean flag in the super-block -
>is that right?

Did you convert the 1.1.5 FS's to 2.0 FS, because the above errors
indicate that 2.0 did something to the super-block?  It alsmo may be
symlink errors.

>- is there a fix?

Don't boot 1.1.5. :)

>- is it safe to use the filesystems un-fsck'd under 1.1.5.1 (that is,
>  as safe as usual)?

I wouldn't trust them myself.

Something is happening to the super-blocks.  It may be symlinks, which 
are much different in 2.0 than in 1.1.5.  David Greenman spent some
time making the 2.0 FS and fsck code understand the 1.X FS intracacies, but
it's much harder to be forward compatible and make the 1.X FS and fsck code
understand the 2.X stuff.

It's possible that the 2.0 symlinks are messing up the 1.1.5 fsck, or
that the bugs that exist in the 1.1.5 which were fixed in 2.0 are
manifesting themselves.


Nate
-- 
nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu     |  FreeBSD dude and all around tech.
nate@cs.montana.edu          |  weenie.
work #: (406) 994-5980       |  Unemployed, looking for permanant work in
home #: (406) 586-0579       |  CS/EE field.