![](https://seccdn.libravatar.org/avatar/5a94d2f8a5845d5f1c1ea1556fc0cb72.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
You should never ever do an fsck on a rw mounted partition. Why, Surely fsck would need to write changes to correct the fs? So you are saying that eventhough they mention the option of remounting RW, I shouldm't? from the e2fsck man page, "Note that in general it is not safe to run e2fsck on mounted file systems. The only exception is if the -n option is specified, and -c, -l, or -L options are not specified. However, even if it is safe to do so, the results printed by e2fsck are not valid if
Hylton Conacher(ZR1HPC) wrote: the file system is mounted. If e2fsck asks whether or not you should check a file system which is mounted, the only correct answer is ``no''. Only experts who really know what they are doing should consider answering this question in any other way." IIUC, the file system needs to be stable and quiet to be checked, and if it is mounted rw, activity could change things and make the check worse than useless. Unless needed to run the fsck command, like the root file system, which would need to be mounted to access the command, and thus is mounted ro by the repair system, you should fsck an unmounted (and therefore guaranteed quiet) file system. HTH. BTW, it can write to repair the system without it being mounted, just as fdisk can write a partition table to an blank and unmountable HD. It was written to do so. -- Joe Morris Registered Linux user 231871