Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Re: fsck versus fsck_hfs' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Re: fsck versus fsck_hfs
Authored by: nobody on Aug 16, '03 12:33:01PM

If you call fsck, it will, if the program is able to determine that the volume you want to repair/check is a hfs volume, it will call fsck_hfs.
Do a ls -l /sbin/fsck* and you will see.
If you have a linux i386, there will be more versions of fsck*, depending non your installed filesystems in the kernel. OSX currently only supports hfs and "msdos" - FAT. Panther will introduce ntfs. There is some work ongoing at sourceforge to support EXT2 as a kernel extension in OSX.
So, it does not matter if you call fsck.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Re: fsck versus fsck_hfs
Authored by: sjk on Aug 18, '03 08:19:53PM
Do a ls -l /sbin/fsck* and you will see.

Actually, running strings /sbin/fsck | fgrep hfs is more supportive of your statement. :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]