In article <20050406023846.GJ21848@bcd.geek.com.au> you wrote:
> Until then, it seemed to behave flawlessly, and certainly worked
> better than the last time I tried it.  Before filling it, I unmounted
> it and ran a fsck_lfs, which came up clean (though it took a *very*
> long time and seemed to be heavily CPU bound, I'll try and do some profiling
> of it at some point later to figure out where its spinning).

Wasn't the point of LFS to not require a time-consuming fsck-run?


 - Hubert

-- 
  ___ _ _  _   _        * Harddisk Image Cloning * 
 / __| | || | | |           www.feyrer.de/g4u/
| (_ |_  _| |_| |         
 \___| |_| \___/          Version 2.0 out now!