On November 19, 2001 17:37, you wrote:
> Even so, I'm wondering wether this removal is standardad
> procedure for hiding it once and for all or not?
On my system, the journal appears to have a perfectly normal inode number for
a root entry (#22), which makes me think that it's just a normal file as far
as the core filesystem code is concerned. So, when the file is deleted, its
blocks are freed, and new allocations are free to walk all over the journal.
That is if the filesystem doesn't barf because the superblock references a
deleted inode for its journal. Just a theory, though.
Now, I heard (from the same source I vaugely remember reading about hidden
journals, so take this with a grain of salt) that tune2fs would try to use
reserved inode #8 for the .journal if possible, and the filesystem could
handle deletion in that case just fine. So, hopefully the partition of yours
was using the reserved inode number. Seeing deletion is no longer dangerous,
tune2fs may have decidedly not set the immutable flag so that you're free to
'hide' it using rm.
I think this is the part where the ext3 gods step in and free us from our
ignorance-inspired conjecture.
> Since what's there to stop you from 'chattr -i .journal ; rm .journal'.
I think that's a case of "don't do that, then". I took the immutable flag
being set as a pretty clear indiction that if I cleared the flag and started
to play with the file, I pretty much deserve whatever I get. ;)
-Ryan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 23 2001 - 21:00:22 EST