This does raise the question of how a user would repair filesystem errors if this option only checks for errors and does not present the option to repair any issues found.
Should the be an option to do that?
Tom
On Nov 19, 2022, at 7:47 AM, Leo-Andres Hofmann hofmann@leo-andres.de wrote:
Ok, this was probably a bad idea. So please ignore/remove this patch. Sorry for the noise.
Am 19.11.2022 um 12:53 schrieb Michael Tremer: I can second this.
Why is fsck more obvious then “file system check”?
It is a more technical term which does not provide any more detail in my opinion.
-Michael
On 18 Nov 2022, at 18:02, Tom Rymes tom@rymes.net wrote:
I'm still confused by what a user might expect, OTHER than a fsck check?
On 11/18/2022 10:42 AM, Robin Roevens wrote:
Some users assume that "check filesystem" does more than just trigger a simple "fsck" run. This patch changes the button label to avoid confusion. - NL translation Signed-off-by: Robin Roevens robin.roevens@disroot.org
langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl b/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl index 4fd6955cc..ebac2754a 100644 --- a/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl +++ b/langs/nl/cgi-bin/nl.pl @@ -1804,6 +1804,7 @@ 'read list' => 'lijst met readonly hosts', 'real address' => 'Echte adressen', 'reboot' => 'Herstarten', +'reboot fsck' => 'Herstart & start ‘fsck’', 'reboot ask' => 'Herstarten?', 'reboot question' => 'Extra vraag voor herstart en afsluiten', 'reboot schedule' => 'Inplannen IPFire herstarts',