Re: e2fsprogs - possible regression between 1.42.7 and 1.42.8
From: Eric Sandeen <hidden>
Date: 2013-09-04 14:02:12
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 9/4/13 3:04 AM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
Hello Eric, I'm very sorry for such a late reply, I was a bit busy with other projects.. Well, I don't really understand what I should do with the images now :) But if I understand previous discussion well, my problem is not caused by code regressions, but new tests which were added to this new version right? The problems failed tests report are related to filesystems with 1K block size, so unless I use such filesystems, I'm safe to skip tests and use this new version, especially since I've been using 1.42.7 till now, right? Or is there some git commit fixing those issues I should try? Thanks a lot for Your time and sorry about my lame questions..
Nah, not lame. To be honest, I've lost track of which resize2fs bugs are fixed and which are not; some have been sent to the list, some have not been fixed, and the e2fsprogs git tree hasn't been updated for over 2 months. So I'm really not sure where things stand right now. :( In any case, I don't _think_ that this particular bug is yet fixed. - -Eric
with best regards nikola ciprich On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 09:10:53PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: On 7/30/13 9:03 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
On 7/29/13 11:13 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:quoted
On 7/29/13 3:39 AM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:quoted
Hi,quoted
quoted
trying to compile latest e2fsprogs and running check under RHEL6-compatible distro (centos) fails:quoted
quoted
r_1024_small_bg: ext2 1024 blocksize with small block groups: failed r_ext4_small_bg: ext4 1024 blocksize with small block groups: failedquoted
quoted
dunno whether this is known issue... will bisect help?quoted
quoted
with regardsquoted
quoted
nikquoted
Ted, these are the same ones I saw, plus one I think (working on getting all the info).Sorry this took a while. Attached is a qcow image of a broken r_1024_small_bg filesystem. Doing resize2fs -M on it twice should corrupt it, even on x86_64.Sorry - the image as attached is not broken, but 2 current resize2fs -M's break it. -Ericquoted
quoted
quoted
(aside: the test is a bit weird, it does: echo $RESIZE2FS $RESIZE2FS_OPTS -d 31 -M $TMPFILE $SIZE_2 >> $LOG 2>&1 but specifying -M as well as a size doesn't make much sense?) -Ericquoted
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSJz1fAAoJECCuFpLhPd7gwxoP/A+0ARl3XX6JJV7SfpVhvFKg qevX6hQnmFD6XgmCnRI1P4SR0NGnfeot8ZIEOGr9W954dENx+9gcF6q6oLUnsrO8 jqBXnUjPIsjYkAD3d5RpK3ygRuOQMMmRtruoSYlEfivG8fYfl0/pbLKDrOhHy/3F 57lsyDwquJhLbIplLu+upe7vctHL9o0QDU0dBVdfrSDTmqD/KOP93qPlK/HfCKip XzTWENnJmLL8WAG6AfbOfWTFFMnKk2qHdglB4VOdNBqiuCLRytScQc5ordwz/Aip NIt9FMcjXQoNgu/IlM8m4gH0UTBkMQDw85cojqbIkMmhUX9gtgUepzMmEKnTViCj iMBM/596dI83Icnh/1nEC/iZ7s0x4yZYwn7l6VTMyW8/gGwYTkGuo4IpD5neeEN6 6b8xRY7YtNdoFlfAWjfssQ7k4JdIPVGX4gJoEyulG4qEJZ70X0R9E8C2tfU3IXSE YsD9fH+w1o0iaNRpuNXpQ1Jy1uA42UHubYgKnAPsHmbAhHS60woC2/+K1lOi4Ree ye1tNAVC9edicNi2L+wLrPwxYnMMv2+x8gs5nfM/PoOPhY8BvqJil2r5QHnsa1q1 cOWQfA9GQ0t+IG9TEgIAQqzdh3QZIs6KEIvDHB1IQk544jVbUG35DOaAPxZsNHJa Cic9x4MFhKsqb+Qb5jw/ =AQPh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----