operation not permitted on entropy file

David Benfell benfell at parts-unknown.org
Sun Aug 10 22:40:56 UTC 2014

On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 12:44:33PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> Allow me a small additional statement:
> On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 12:31:19 +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
> > If a filesystem isn't dismounted properly (e.g. because of a crash), you
> > should get a warning during the next boot. And the system would run a
> > filesystem check in "preen" mode (see fsck(8)). If it finds serious errors
> > that cannot be repaired in preen mode, you should get an error message.
> The problem is: When you do _not_ have
> 	background_fsck="NO"
> in /etc/rc.conf, all this happens in background, and soon you're
> in XDM and your X session, so you don't get the error message.
> Still the system continues booting and working "normally" for
> the price of "silent" file system corruption.

I was wondering about this.
> In my opinion, this setting should be the default. It's better
> to have a delay in the boot process, or a _stop_ of the boot
> process in case a severe file system damage has been detected.
> I also think it's more important to know about this fact than
> it is to quickly be guided into a "comfortable environment"
> that makes you believe everything is okay, while in fact it
> isn't.

Based on this experience, I agree. And I have now implemented the
above setting. I don't think crashes should be treated as normal,
especially when, as I do, you have a UPS providing backup power.
> > Trying to make a backup in this state will probably not work.
> Maybe files cannot be read, or are improperly read (and therefore
> wrongly represented in the backup). When I do backups, I usually
> make sure two things: 1st, the file system is _clean_, 2nd, the
> file system is protected against alteration (r/o mount, or not
> mounted at all). I know there are "snapshots" (as they exist in
> relation with fsck, too), but I don't trust them. Many years ago,
> such a snapshot made it _impossible_ for fsck to do its job. Once
> it was removed, I got my files back (for the price of a few lost
> file names, but still better than nothing).
Perhaps I misunderstand. I thought journaling was supposed to
*increase* the robustness of a filesystem. It seems to me that what
this amounts to is the contrary.


David Benfell <benfell at parts-unknown.org>
See https://parts-unknown.org/node/2 if you don't understand the
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20140810/9bfd5df0/attachment.sig>

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list