mirror of https://github.com/vitalif/e2fsprogs
e2fsck: remove 'invalid' wording from error when extent block fails checksum
Don't say the physical block number is invalid if an extent block fails only the checksum. It passes checks, so it's not invalid. Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>crypto
parent
dc7b8dad99
commit
a93a90d2ae
|
@ -998,7 +998,7 @@ static struct e2fsck_problem problem_table[] = {
|
|||
*/
|
||||
{ PR_1_EXTENT_ONLY_CSUM_INVALID,
|
||||
N_("@i %i extent block passes checks, but checksum does not match "
|
||||
"extent\n\t(logical @b %c, @n physical @b %b, len %N)\n"),
|
||||
"extent\n\t(logical @b %c, physical @b %b, len %N)\n"),
|
||||
PROMPT_FIX, 0 },
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|||
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
|
||||
Inode 12 extent block passes checks, but checksum does not match extent
|
||||
(logical block 698, invalid physical block 1788, len 1)
|
||||
(logical block 698, physical block 1788, len 1)
|
||||
Fix? yes
|
||||
|
||||
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|||
Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes
|
||||
Inode 12 extent block passes checks, but checksum does not match extent
|
||||
(logical block 7, invalid physical block 1090, len 1)
|
||||
(logical block 7, physical block 1090, len 1)
|
||||
Fix? yes
|
||||
|
||||
Pass 2: Checking directory structure
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue