On Jan 3, 2014, at 5:33 AM, Marc MERLIN <marc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Would it be possible for whoever maintains btrfs-tools to change both > the man page and the help included in the tool to clearly state that > running the fsck tool is unlikely to be the right course of action > and talk about btrfs-zero-log as well as mount -o recovery? The problem FAQ doesn't even mention btrfsck so I think people are just getting around that page or making assumptions. https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Problem_FAQ Should btrfs check (btrfsck without --repair) work similar to xfs_repair when the file system is not cleanly unmounted? If an XFS volume is not cleanly unmounted, running xfs_repair will instruct the user to first mount the volume so that the journal is replayed, then umount the volume, then run xfs_repair. A possible variant of this for btrfs check: inform the user the first step in repairing a problem Btrfs volume is to use -o recovery, for more information see Btrfs FAQ <url> for additional problem solving recommendations. ? Chris Murphy-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
