<html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> The -S was advised by a member of the Fedora Users Mailing List, and I thought I would try it. I still have the original disk, so no permanent harm. I keep trying what is suggested on a copy of the partition. Only drag is the copying :) It is a 400GiB partition (400 * 1024^3). I am currently scanning the parition for a superblock, starting at -b 0, and keep incrementing by 512, until I find what"might be" a superblock; i.e. fsck does not say "Bad magic number". Of course, that's no guarantee it is a superblock, but it gives me an opportunity to examine the superblock at that offset. Regards, JD <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/20/2014 12:14 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: </div> <blockquote cite="mid:20140920181432.GB14788@thunk.org" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 07:56:37PM -0600, jd1008 wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I am reporting this on the advice of the Fedora Users Mailing List Member. This the mailing list exchange outlining the problem with specifying -S to mkfs, and it's subsequent consequences when fsck is run. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> If none of the possible superblocks are valid when using mke2fs -b <NNN>, there's a good chance that your partition table (or LVM metadata) has gotten corrupted. You should definitely check to make sure the partition setup is sane before trying to use mke2fs -S. It's also true, as Andreas has stated, that with the large number of new file system options and layouts with ext4, mke2fs -S is much more hazardous unless you __really__ know what you are doing. It would probably be a good idea to have some warning messages to that effect in the man page. - Ted </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html>