Ok I just took another look at this.... It seems that when I rebooted
the box I accidentially booted it into the wrong kernel! DOH!
I was running 2.2.12 instead of 2.3.40.... Once I booted back into 2.3.40
it was fine... Sorry for the false alarm :(
Mike
On Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 12:05:01PM -0500, Mike Panetta wrote:
> I am currently using the version of e2fsck that comes with redhat 6.1
> e2fsck 1.15 is what it says. For ext2 fs v 0.5b.
>
> Does this help?
>
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 09:52:22AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > You write:
> > > Just resently I have started messing with the lfs facilities now
> > > in place in the devel kernels and I have run into a few problems.
> > >
> > > Here are my problems:
> > >
> > > o I can create files larger than 4GB BUT I cannot remove them cleanly.
> > > o On a reboot e2fsck truncates any file larger than 4GB to 4GB.
> > >
> > > Also... the first time I ran e2fsck it complained to me about having a large
> > > file on the FS... It said I needed to turn on some flag in the superblock
> > > (I cant remember the name) to enable LFS support... How do I turn it on
> > > if e2fsck didnt already? What is the flag named? Is there any real docs
> > > on how to set up LFS in linux? I cant seem to find any.
> >
> > You didn't mention if you installed a new e2fsprogs. The latest version
> > is 1.18 I believe. However, looking through the ext2 code that I have
> > (2.3.34 only), it does not set the EXT2_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_LARGE_FILE flag
> > in the superblock as far as I can see, so e2fsck probably has no chance to
> > get it right anyways. If it isn't already in the recent kernel, you need
> > something like the following in fs/ext2/inode.c:ext2_update_inode():
> >
> > if (S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
> > raw_inode->i_dir_acl = cpu_to_le32(inode->u.ext2_i.i_dir_acl);
> > | else {
> > raw_inode->i_size_high = cpu_to_le32(inode->i_size >> 32);
> > + if (raw_inode->i_size_high)
> > + inode->i_sb->u.ext2_sb.s_feature_ro_compat |=
> > + EXT2_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_LARGE_FILE;
> > + }
> >
> > I'm not 100% sure this is the right way to do it (not even sure that the
> > syntax is correct), but at least it's a start... It seems likely that
> > you may also need to have (in addition to or instead of the above):
> >
> > + inode->i_sb->u.ext2_sb.s_es->s_feature_ro_compat |=
> > + EXT2_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_LARGE_FILE;
> > + mark_buffer_dirty(inode->i_sb->u.ext2_sb.s_sbh, 1);
> > + inode->i_sb->s_dirt = 1;
> >
> > The latter will change the superblock on the disk - note the s_es in there,
> > and it should be written out when it is marked dirty. It may also be
> > nice to check if the flag is already set via EXT2_HAS_RO_COMPAT_FEATURE()
> > so we don't write out the superblock for each update of a large file...
> >
> > Cheers, Andreas
> > --
> > Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
> > \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?"
> > http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
> --
--- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 04 2000 - 14:27:24 EST