5.3-BETA2 df(1) reports incorrect values for UFS1 FS
David Wolfskill
david at catwhisker.org
Sat Sep 4 08:02:53 PDT 2004
>Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 18:01:11 +1000
>From: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy at optushome.com.au>
>To: current at freebsd.org
>Subject: 5.3-BETA2 df(1) reports incorrect values for UFS1 FS
>Sender: owner-freebsd-current at freebsd.org
>On a 4.10 system, my /home reports as:
>Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on
>/dev/ad0s3g 86710002 71758104 8015098 90% 1803049 9038549 17% /home
>When I mount it on a 5.3-BETA2 system, I get:
>Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on
>/dev/ad0s3g 86710002 1929924 77843278 2% 70983 10770615 1% /home
Odd....
>This is somewhat disconcerting. As far as I can tell, all the files are
>there but 5.3 doesn't realise it.
>fsck on 5.3 reports no errors and:
>1803048 files, 35879051 used, 42390039 free (1903 frags, 5298517 blocks, 0.0% fragmentation)
>fsck on 4.10 reports no errors and:
>1803048 files, 35879051 used, 7475950 free (390462 frags, 885656 blocks, 0.9% fragmentation)
Hmmm...
>Any ideas what is wrong with 5.3? More critically, is it safe to write
>to a UFS1 filesystem with 5.3?
Although it might be considered risky, each system where I run 5.x is
set up so that:
* Each file system backed by its own partitin (within a slice) is UFS1.
This way, I can mount each of them while running 4.x and do repair
work, for example.
* The system multi-boots FreeBSD, and I do most of my work on 4.x
(at this time). (My "production" systems run snapshots of 4.x
that I build every couple of weeks.)
* I track each of RELENG_4 and RELENG_5 (was HEAD before RELENG_5 was
tagged) on a daily basis (unless "cvs update" shows no changes to the
sources in question since last time).
I am not seeing the problems you report.
In particular, here's my build machine (the laptop is still doing this
morning's "make buildworld" for RELENG_5, so it won't be done for a
while):
First, RELENG_5, freshly built:
freebeast(5.3)[1] uname -a
FreeBSD freebeast.catwhisker.org 5.3-BETA3 FreeBSD 5.3-BETA3 #14: Sat Sep 4 07:26:33 PDT 2004 root at freebeast.catwhisker.org:/common/S3/obj/usr/src/sys/FREEBEAST i386
freebeast(5.3)[2] df -ki
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on
/dev/ad0s3a 158767 108172 37894 74% 3909 36025 10% /
devfs 1 1 0 100% 0 0 100% /dev
/dev/ad0s3e 1873113 913919 809345 53% 87517 383073 19% /usr
/dev/ad0s4h 27728233 14294775 11215200 56% 862175 6087263 12% /common
/dev/ad0s4g 2032839 425583 1444629 23% 47282 461068 9% /var
procfs 4 4 0 100% 1 0 100% /proc
/dev/md0 507630 8 467012 0% 5 65785 0% /tmp
freebeast(5.3)[3]
And here's RELENG_4:
freebeast(4.10-S)[1] uname -a
FreeBSD freebeast.catwhisker.org 4.10-STABLE FreeBSD 4.10-STABLE #987: Fri Sep 3 05:26:57 PDT 2004 root at freebeast.catwhisker.org:/common/S1/obj/usr/src/sys/FREEBEAST i386
freebeast(4.10-S)[2] df -ki
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity iused ifree %iused Mounted on
/dev/ad0s1a 158767 47187 98879 32% 1902 38032 5% /
mfs:25 515606 6 474352 0% 4 64506 0% /tmp
/dev/ad0s1e 1873082 1009417 713819 59% 90564 380026 19% /usr
/dev/ad0s2a 158767 47187 98879 32% 1902 38032 5% /S2
/dev/ad0s2e 1873113 946906 776358 55% 87586 383004 19% /S2/usr
/dev/ad0s3a 158767 108172 37894 74% 3909 36025 10% /S3
/dev/ad0s3e 1873113 913919 809345 53% 87517 383073 19% /S3/usr
/dev/ad0s4a 158767 108249 37817 74% 3909 36025 10% /S4
/dev/ad0s4e 1872759 910011 812928 53% 84059 386531 18% /S4/usr
/dev/ad0s4h 27728233 14294777 11215198 56% 862176 6087262 12% /common
/dev/ad0s4g 2032839 425642 1444570 23% 47278 461072 9% /var
procfs 4 4 0 100% 50 4034 1% /proc
freebeast(4.10-S)[3]
(You may see that more file systems show up under RELENG_4. I do not
mount the RELENG_4 file systems necessary for running the system by
default when booting 5.x or higher.)
As noted, I have not had the problems you are reporting. The last issue
I recall was something that was committed to fsck (iirC) by Matt Dillon
(to avoid a 4.x fsck seeing a superblock updated by a 5.x fsck as broken).
As implied by the committer, that wa a while back.
Peace,
david
--
David H. Wolfskill david at catwhisker.org
Evidence of curmudgeonliness: becoming irritated with the usage of the
word "speed" in contexts referring to quantification of network
performance, as opposed to "bandwidth" or "latency."
More information about the freebsd-current
mailing list