thanks for your really fast answer. I do not know how to get fsck version number, but I had the following output:
fsck from util-linux 2.20.1
e2fsck 1.42 (29-Nov-2011)
However I have run `e2fsck f_dup5.img` on your attachment at #6, and no error was reported, so I do not know how if I can trust the "1.42 (29-Nov-2011)" part:
e2fsck 1.42 (29-Nov-2011)
f_dup5.img: clean, 13/16 files, 43/100 blocks
Anyway, I do not think I am willing to run fsck again as it takes 4 days to complete, and the data is not that important.
What I am more worried about is what could have caused it, and how serious this is. Do you have a clue?
Would deleting (or cp file bak; rm file; mv bak file) solve the problem?
(at least I have done some cp/rm and the number of errors decreased, but I wonder whether it’s just shallow or the real problem is gone)
Hi Theodore,
thanks for your really fast answer. I do not know how to get fsck version number, but I had the following output:
fsck from util-linux 2.20.1
e2fsck 1.42 (29-Nov-2011)
However I have run `e2fsck f_dup5.img` on your attachment at #6, and no error was reported, so I do not know how if I can trust the "1.42 (29-Nov-2011)" part:
e2fsck 1.42 (29-Nov-2011)
f_dup5.img: clean, 13/16 files, 43/100 blocks
Anyway, I do not think I am willing to run fsck again as it takes 4 days to complete, and the data is not that important.
What I am more worried about is what could have caused it, and how serious this is. Do you have a clue?
Would deleting (or cp file bak; rm file; mv bak file) solve the problem?
(at least I have done some cp/rm and the number of errors decreased, but I wonder whether it’s just shallow or the real problem is gone)
Best