DSM-G600, DNS-3xx and NSA-220 Hack Forum

pscott wrote:

I just tried this yesterday, and it ran much quicker than I expected.  I have 2 1TB drives in my box, each as an individual volume.

Much quicker? hmmm, if your filesystem needs checking if should take about an hour for each disk! That's why dlink/conceptronic removed that needed feature from their firmware, "availability". (and because ext3 was not working in the initial versions)

With ext3, fsck "its not need", only every xxx mounts or yyy months, it depends on you, check current values with "tune2fs -l /dev/sda2", look at Check interval: and Maximum mount count.

However, now my entire 2nd volume is marked as read-only.  Checking with the user privileges page, the drive is marked as R/W.  What gives, and how do I return it to R/W?

If it is marked as read-only is because fsck failed on it, and yafsck mounted it that way to avoid further errors. Have you read the produced FSCK.log file at /mnt/HD_a2?  What does it say? In certain circunstances it is not possible to write the file, as when the filesystem is remounted read-only.

The "mount" command should give more details than the web page.

You can try to do a clean reboot... or diagnose first the problem, There are commands to force a remount in read/write mode, but you must know what you are doing before issuing them. That's why I don't quote them here (for now). ;-)

pscott wrote:

Here's what the end of the fsck.log at /mnt/HD_a2 said:

-----------------------------------------
Filesystems ready to check:  /dev/sdb2

Start checking /dev/sdb2 at 19:02:02
/dev/sdb2: Adding dirhash hint to filesystem.

/dev/sdb2 contains a file system with errors, check forced.
/dev/sdb2: Inode 8769 is in use, but has dtime set.  FIXED.
/dev/sdb2: Inode 8769 has imagic flag set.

/dev/sdb2: UNEXPECTED INCONSISTENCY; RUN fsck MANUALLY.
    (i.e., without -a or -p options)
e2fsck on /dev/sdb2 status: 4, PARTITION /dev/sdb2 CHECK ERROR, USER ATTENTION NEEDED!
PARTITION /dev/sdb2 MOUNTED READ ONLY

Done, filesystems mounted and services restarted at Tue Jun  2 19:03:29 GMT 2009.
-----------------------------------------

So you have a real problem at hands.
I would recommend to backup your data while you still can access it.

The problem with running fsck in manual mode, as itself recomends (these are fsck messages, not my script):

  /dev/sdb2: UNEXPECTED INCONSISTENCY; RUN fsck MANUALLY.
      (i.e., without -a or -p options)

is that it is going to make you some really strange questions, and you don't know what you to answer. Most people don't, so fsck has an option, "-y", to always give (on behalf of you) an YES answer to all questions. Of course it can be the wrong answer... There is also a "-n" option.

The "good" news is that the faulty disk is the second one, so you can run fsck without special needs.
First kill all processes, except your telnet session
Then "cd /"
Then "umount /dev/sdb2"
if it says its busy, there is still some process accessing it, kill it.
Then "fsck /dev/sdb2" and the strange questions start appearing. It can be just one, two or three or one-thousand...
At the end fsck will almost certainty tell you to reboot. Do it, don't try mounting the partition. And that's it.

I should refrain myself from given advices in this matter. In my experience, "fsck -n /dev/sdb2" doesn't solve any problem, while "fsck -y /dev/sdb2" produces a lot of frightening messages. Its your choice. The other is do nothing. Up to you.

My problem is that the manual mode does not work.  My telnet session just hangs with no response after invoking the manual mode.  I've got ffp 0.5, and your script seems to be in the correct folder.  The first few lines of your script are echoed, then telenet session is suspended, as expected.

After that, drives lights go orange, but I cannot telnet in again, as there is no response when starting a new telnet session.
...
My question is though: why can I not get the manual mode to work?  Obviously the script is finding errors on the second drive, which is why it's mounted read-only.

We can try to diagnose that latter.

Last edited by jcard (2009-06-04 10:46:45)