Ubuntu 9.04 with file issues Cross posted by intent- we're supposed to compare notes on such problems - I hope.

[Jeffrey Watts]

On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Jack <quiet_celt at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> I'm not being dramatic, merely stating the facts. Feel free to point out
> which of my statements is not factual, and correct me if you find an error
> in anything I said. Please be specific and quote verifiable sources for your
> proofs.


Oh please, give me a break.  Sources for my proofs?  LOL, I didn't realize
that you were defending your dissertation.

I'm not asserting that your statements have no merit, I'm arguing that your
presentation was flawed.  You quickly turned the thread away from the
original poster's intent and turned it into a discussion on your strange
hatred of a command line option on a rather mundane tool.  I really could
have done without that.

Since you wanted examples, here are some of the statements you made that
struck me as dubious or hyperbolic:

* "Fsck -y" is like having unprotected sex with the entire adult
entertainment industry.  (I actually laughed at this one, but despite its
fun factor it's clearly hyperbolic)

* Please, anyone paying attention to this thread do not run "fsck -y". That
is just flat out dangerous, and could really screw up your fs. Seriously,
why did they ever add that option? In fact, I'd recommend everyone download
the source and disable that sick bit of code and recompile  (LOL, let me get
right on that one...)

* Fsck -y is, and was, designed for use by system administrators who know
what they are doing. It's not meant to be the lazy man's alternate to safe
fs recovery.  (in this example I'd argue that the exact OPPOSITE is true)

There is some good information contained in your posts, and I agree that the
original poster was probably looking for more information than just "fsck
-y".  However I didn't like that you felt that you needed to go on this
crusade about the -y option.  You could have made your point with much less
hot air.

I also stand by my assertion that for the majority of people, in the
majority of cases of file system corruption, "fsck -y" is the best option.
It's also what is generally recommended by others in this profession.
Remember, most folks facing this problem aren't experts and don't have the
knowledge, tools, or inclination to do a thorough recovery.

My "source" for this opinion is my experience in working with Linux for
sixteen years~
Jeffrey.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/attachments/20100910/5f5b848a/attachment-0001.htm>