Re: swapon vs savecore dilemma

Scott Long wrote:

> Doug White wrote:
>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> It looks like we may need to rethink the way swap is mounted at boot 
>> time
>> if we want crashdumps to work.
>>
>
> I question the wizdom of what you're describing.  If swap space needs to
> be made available for fsck to run, then what happens to the crashdump
> data that used to be on the swap partition?  Doing a swapon(8) means
> that nothing in the swap partition is reliable or consistent anymore.
>
> Scott
>
Yes, I have seen this too.
Sep  2 02:16:30 darkstar savecore: /dev/da0s1b: Operation not permitted
Sep  2 02:16:30 darkstar savecore: no dumps found

Is fsck really that memory heavy so that it needs swap?
Wouldn't fsck -> mount -> savecore -> swapon be a more appropriate order?

    - Pawel