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

Sat Apr 30 17:56:14 UTC 2016
William Warren <hescominsoon at gmail.com>

ALL systems need patching so obsessing about uptime is insecurity on its 
face.  It doe not matter if it is windows or linux or anything else.

On 4/30/2016 11:33 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On Sat, April 30, 2016 8:54 am, William Warren wrote:
>> uptime=insecurity.
> This sounds like MS Windows admin's statement. Are there any Unix admins
> still left around who remember systems with kernel that doesn't need
> [security] patching for few years? And libc that does not need security
> patches often. I almost said glibc, but on those Unixes it was libc;
> glibc, however, wasn't getting security patches too often some long time
> ago as well. Because these are only kernel and libc/glibc that do require
> reboot (no splice or similar for me on servers, thank you).
> It sounds to me like the system you are talking about, and us, sysadmins
> administering it, is pretty much in MS Widows ballpark already. Right?
> Sorry about my rant. I still consider not well debugged code not well
> debugged code...
> Valeri
>> Patches must be kept up these days or your uptime
>> won't matter when your server gets compromised.
>> On 4/22/2016 4:33 AM, Rob Townley wrote:
>>> 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CentOS mailing list
>>> CentOS at centos.org
>>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS at centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Valeri Galtsev
> Sr System Administrator
> Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
> Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
> University of Chicago
> Phone: 773-702-4247
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos