Comment # 10 on bug 1175637 from Fabian Vogt

(In reply to Wolfgang Bauer from comment #6)
> (In reply to Fabian Vogt from comment #5)
> > Ok, so they should not actually be unreferenced.
> They may be if the cached entries are purged from the database (which is
> just a cache), but the referenced files in file_db_data were not/could not
> be deleted for some reason.
> 
> Just a thought: maybe akonadictl fsck cannot rename/move the files because
> they are actually still in use by some process?

Fortunately this is not Windows, so unlinking succeeds regardless of open
handles. Not even mandatory locks can prevent that apparently.

> And maybe akonadi itself fails to delete them in the first place when it
> removes entries from the cache for the same reason? (resulting in those
> unreferenced files to exist)
> I suppose the strace should show if that's the case...

Yep, adding NEEDINFO back.