Bug 9164

Summary:	fsck missing in emergency shell
Product:	Mageia	Reporter:	Daniel Kjellin <mandriva>
Component:	RPM Packages	Assignee:	Mageia Bug Squad <bugsquad>
Status:	RESOLVED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	major
Priority:	Normal	CC:	davidwhodgins, mageia, thierry.vignaud, tmb
Version:	Cauldron
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:	MGA2TOO
Source RPM:	systemd, initscripts, dracut	CVE:
Status comment:

Description Daniel Kjellin 2013-02-23 02:26:03 CET

I recently had a problem with the root fs and during boot I am dropped to the emergency shell with the instructions "run fsck manuall" and it lists which device to run on. However fsck is not available in the shell. I had to boot using a rescue cd, run the fsck and then return and the system started normally.

I think one of the following would be acceptable
1. Update the instructions printed to say that "you will need to boot from a different media and run fsck manually"
2. Include fsck in the emergency shell so I can proceed.

Manuel Hiebel 2013-02-24 13:51:21 CET

CC: (none) => thierry.vignaud
Source RPM: (none) => drakx-installer-rescue

Manuel Hiebel 2013-02-24 13:53:16 CET

Version: 2 => Cauldron
Whiteboard: (none) => MGA2TOO

Comment 1 Thierry Vignaud 2013-02-24 19:48:16 CET

This has nothing to do with drakx-installer-rescue

CC: (none) => mageia
Source RPM: drakx-installer-rescue => systemd, initscripts, dracut

Comment 2 Thomas Backlund 2013-02-24 21:45:18 CET

Oh its there...

its' by its real name e2fsck 

it's only the fsck* symlinks that is not in the initrd

CC: (none) => tmb

Comment 3 Daniel Kjellin 2013-02-26 10:00:25 CET

So it is! When it happened again I found it and indeed it worked. 
So I suppose if we could update the text to point this fact out (I missed it completely and I am quite familiar with Linux). Or of course, better yet, add the symlinks. If neither of these are possible options, close this bug.

Comment 4 Colin Guthrie 2013-02-26 10:20:18 CET

Well correct me if I'm wrong, but if we want a generic fsck binary in the image, we'd need to include both the symlinks and the fsck binary itself. If our goal is to keep the initrd small to ensure boot times are not negatively affected, should we add such "bloat" (I use the term loosely, but it's definitely not *required* as such)? In this case it's tiny, but it's just the thin end of the wedge... soon EmacsOS will be in there ;)

Add to this the fact that I personally, having used Linux for >15 years, have never once called fsck directly. I've always used the tool for the FS I'm dealing with directly. When poking about in my filesystems, I want to be in total control!! Everyone is different here tho' :)

So IMO, we should just close this bug. I don't think it's an issue that needs fixing.

Also note that if you include the "debug" dracut module (just add a config file to /etc/dracut.conf.d/foo.conf with:
  add_dracutmodules+=" debug "
) then you will get various debugging tools, including the fsck binary etc. If this is what you would like to have on your system, then I think it's OK to configure it yourself.

Also note that any message regarding "running fsck manually" must come from the specific fsck binary in question, not from dracut.

Hope this is an OK resolution for everyone. Feel free to argue the case if you feel strongly.

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => WONTFIX

Comment 5 Thierry Vignaud 2013-02-26 18:08:41 CET

Colin we can fix the text if it's wrong...

Comment 6 Colin Guthrie 2013-02-26 19:20:00 CET

@tv As I mentioned above, I think the message must come from the actual fsck binary used rather than dracut. e.g. e2fsck.

Certainly I cannot find any such error message in dracut itself (not ruling out me being blind tho'!)

Comment 7 Dave Hodgins 2013-02-27 00:16:34 CET

strings /sbin/e2fsck|grep -i manual
%s: UNEXPECTED INCONSISTENCY; RUN fsck MANUALLY.

CC: (none) => davidwhodgins