Bug 468479

Summary: Extra output seems to confuse resizing in anaconda
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Jesse Keating <jkeating>
Component: anacondaAssignee: Anaconda Maintenance Team <anaconda-maint-list>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: dcantrell, esandeen, tcallawa
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-10-30 22:13:30 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 469046    

Description Jesse Keating 2008-10-25 00:07:57 UTC 
When attempting to resize an LVM LV (shrink it down) I got this error screen.  Unfortunately it's a live install and I don't think it's logged anywhere.

Running... ['resize2fs', '-p', '/dev/VolGroup01/LogVol00', '27344M']
Resizing the filesystem on /dev/VolGroup01/LogVol00 to 7000064 (4k) blocks.
Begin pass 3 (max = 292)
Scanning inode table          ----------------------------------------XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
The filesystem on /dev/VolGroup01/LogVol00 is now 7000064 blocks long.



Anaconda thinks the resize failed.
Comment 1 Hans de Goede 2008-10-25 08:17:07 UTC 
*** Bug 468478 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Jeremy Katz 2008-10-26 16:43:56 UTC 
The output isn't the problem -- we say it failed based on the exit status being non-zero.  I'm not seeing any cases of a successful resize returning zero from a quick look through the resize2fs code.  Eric -- any thoughts?

(Also, adjusted the error so that it will at least tell us what was returned)
Comment 3 Eric Sandeen 2008-10-27 01:50:05 UTC 
After the message above, in resize's main():

        printf(_("The filesystem on %s is now %u blocks long.\n\n"),
               device_name, new_size);

the only possible return is (0), and I don't see any called functions between the two points which could lead to an exit().

So I don't get why it thinks it failed...?  I guess it'll be interesting to see the error code ...
Comment 4 Jesse Keating 2008-10-30 22:13:30 UTC 
I can't duplicate this anymore :/