[uClibc]e2fsck problem: (Bad address) while doing inode scan

Erik Andersen andersen at codepoet.org
Mon Mar 31 18:37:51 UTC 2003

On Mon Mar 31, 2003 at 07:54:05PM +0200, Giulio Orsero wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 09:23:25 -0700, Erik Andersen <andersen at codepoet.org>
> wrote:
> >> hda4 is about 9GB
> >[--------snip----------]
> >> _llseek(3, 4294967296, 0x9febfc00, SEEK_SET) = -1 EFAULT (Bad address)
> >
> >Ok.  So you have a 9 GB drive.  And you try to seek past 4 GB
> >with a kernel that does not have large file support, and the
> >kernel is responding by telling you it can't do that.
> >This doesn't look like a uClibc problem to me,
> Remember that is strace of
> e2fsck ..device..
> Are you saying that 2.0 and 2.2 kernels without LFS cannot support e2fsck
> checking partitions larger that 2GB?
> The e2fsck linked against libc5 or glibc-2.2 completes the check on the very
> same partitions using the same runnig kernel. This is why I'm wondering what
> I might have messed up with uclibc. Maybe e2fsprogs misdetects uclibc
> headers and self-configure with wrong assumptions at compile time?

This sounds fairly likely...  Tried doing an strace and comparing
calls to lseek?  When you _compile_ e2fsck are you also compiling 
it using 2.0 or 2.2 kernel header files?  Perhaps e2fsprogs is
checking for LFS support based on the kernel headers it is
compiled against... 


Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--

More information about the uClibc mailing list