[CentOS] tune2fs: Filesystem has unsupported feature(s) while trying to open

[Rob Townley]

tune2fs against a LVM (albeit formatted with ext4) is not the same as
tune2fs against ext4.

Could this possibly be a machine where uptime has outlived its usefulness?

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Matt Garman <matthew.garman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> ># rpm -qf `which tune2fs`
> >e2fsprogs-1.41.12-18.el6.x86_64
>
> That's in the CentOS 6.4 repo, I don't see a newer one through 6.7 but
> I didn't do a thorough check, just with google site: filter.
>
>
> > # cat /etc/redhat-release
> > CentOS release 6.5 (Final)
>
> > # uname -a
> > Linux lnxutil8 2.6.32-504.12.2.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Mar 11 22:03:14
> > UTC 2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> And that's a centosplus kernel in the 6.6 repo; while the regular
> kernel for 6.7 is currently kernel-2.6.32-573.22.1.el6.src.rpm. So I'm
> going to guess you'd have this problem even if you weren't using the
> centosplus kernel.
>
> I suggest you do a yum upgrade anyway, 6.7 is current, clean it up,
> test it, and then while chances are it's still a problem, then it's
> probably a legit bug worth filing. In the meantime you'll have to
> upgrade your e2fsprogs yourself.
>
>
> > I did a little web searching on this, most of the hits were for much
> > older systems, where (for example) the e2fsprogs only supported up to
> > ext3, but the user had an ext4 filesystem.  Obviously that's not the
> > case here.  In other words, the filesystem was created with the
> > mkfs.ext4 binary from the same e2fsprogs package as the tune2fs binary
> > I'm trying to use.
> >
> > Anyone ever seen anything like this?
>
> Well the date of the kernel doesn't tell the whole story, so you need
> a secret decoder ring to figure out what's been backported into this
> distro kernels. There's far far less backporting happening in user
> space tools. So it's not difficult for them to get stale when the
> kernel is providing new features. But I'd say the kernel has newer
> features than the progs supports and the progs are too far behind.
>
> And yes, this happens on the XFS list and the Btrfs list too where
> people are using old progs with new kernels and it can be a problem.
> Sometimes new progs and old kernels are a problem too but that's less
> common.
>
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>