[Mageia-dev] RFC: Patch e2fsprogs to not print the "clean" message on fsck.

[AL13N]

same thing with brtfsck

Op woensdag 13 maart 2013 14:03:02 schreef Colin Guthrie:
> 'Twas brillig, and Colin Guthrie at 13/03/13 12:35 did gyre and gimble:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I would like to propose that we push a patch to e2fsprogs to make it not
> > print out the "clean" message when it checks the filesystem.
> > 
> > In my current boot (which is an experiment without initrds), it prints
> > this message over the top of plymouth and stays during the nice fade
> > transition to gdm and generally makes the boot ugly.
> > 
> > I believe only the e2fsprogs print this message and the others do not
> > e.g. see this comparison with XFS:
> > 
> > [root at jimmy ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=xfs.img bs=1M count=100 >/dev/null
> > 2>&1; mkfs.xfs xfs.img >/dev/null 2>&1; xfs_check xfs.img
> > [root at jimmy ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=ext4.img bs=1M count=100 >/dev/null
> > 2>&1; mkfs.ext4 -F ext4.img >/dev/null 2>&1; fsck.ext4 -a ext4.img
> > ext4.img: clean, 11/25688 files, 8896/102400 blocks
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > My patch would propose to not print the "clean" message when the -a
> > option was passed. This is similar logic which prevents showing the
> > version when -a is passed.
> > 
> > I've not tested this but I will before committing if no-one disapproves
> > of this approach.
> > 
> > --- e2fsprogs-1.42.7/e2fsck/unix.c.orig	2013-03-13 10:57:22.349126868
> > +0000
> > +++ e2fsprogs-1.42.7/e2fsck/unix.c	2013-03-13 12:33:08.340522834 +0000
> > @@ -421,13 +421,14 @@
> > 
> >  	}
> >  	
> >  	/* Print the summary message when we're skipping a full check */
> > 
> > -	log_out(ctx, _("%s: clean, %u/%u files, %llu/%llu blocks"),
> > -		ctx->device_name,
> > -		fs->super->s_inodes_count - fs->super->s_free_inodes_count,
> > -		fs->super->s_inodes_count,
> > -		ext2fs_blocks_count(fs->super) -
> > -		ext2fs_free_blocks_count(fs->super),
> > -		ext2fs_blocks_count(fs->super));
> > +	if (!(ctx->options & E2F_OPT_PREEN))
> > +		log_out(ctx, _("%s: clean, %u/%u files, %llu/%llu blocks"),
> > +			ctx->device_name,
> > +			fs->super->s_inodes_count - fs->super->s_free_inodes_count,
> > +			fs->super->s_inodes_count,
> > +			ext2fs_blocks_count(fs->super) -
> > +			ext2fs_free_blocks_count(fs->super),
> > +			ext2fs_blocks_count(fs->super));
> > 
> >  	next_check = 100000;
> >  	if (fs->super->s_max_mnt_count > 0) {
> >  	
> >  		next_check = fs->super->s_max_mnt_count - fs->super-
>s_mnt_count;
> 
> FWIW, this patch is a bit wrong (as it still prints out a newline and
> some other fluff about when the next check is etc.) and it causes a test
> to fail.
> 
> But an updated and tested patch fixes it up. If there are no complaints,
> I'll push it.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Col