Question about forcing fsck at boottime

[Chris Rees]

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:00:18 +0530
manish jain <invalid.pointer at gmail.com> wrote:
> Having bgfsck enabled is like
> inviting a dragon to dinner when this happens.

2009/3/31 RW <rwmaillists at googlemail.com>:
> If you've done a normal install, soft-updates aren't enabled on /,
> so it will get foreground checked by default.
>
> If I were you I'd reboot into single user mode and do a full fsck on it.


Seriously, why is everyone against background fsck? Can anyone give a
good reason? Please?

Chris

-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?