Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!seismo!esosun!cogen!celerity!rawfish!hutch
From: hutch@rawfish.celerity (Jim Hutchison)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: inode #1
Keywords: file systems, root inode
Message-ID: <282@celerity.UUCP>
Date: 17 Apr 89 19:00:55 GMT
References: <352@anvil.oz>
Sender: news@celerity.UUCP
Reply-To: hutch@rawfish.UUCP (Jim Hutchison)
Organization: FPS Computing
Lines: 18

In article <352@anvil.oz> michi@anvil.oz (Michael Henning) writes:
>[...]  As
>it turns out, inode 1 is not used. The root inode of every file system is 2.
>Can anyone tell me why inode 1 is not used anywhere ?  It seems that it
>could be used, since if 0 indicates that a directory entry is free, why
>not use inode 1 like any other inode ?

I am not sure of the historical significance, but inode 1 was a good place
in system III to hang bad blocks.  I recall using fsdb to do this, love fsdb,
hate system III. :-)  This enabled me to dismount the file system in question,
do work on it, and re-mount it without going into single-user.  Later when
I had more time, I usually made a point of re-formatting the disk and getting
the bad track information updated.  It works as a temporary fix, and is a lot
nicer than having a file in root called BAD_BLOCKS which will get tagged by
every verification program you run.

/*    Jim Hutchison   		{dcdwest,ucbvax}!ucsd!celerity!hutch  */
/*    Disclaimor:  I am not an official spokesman for FPS computing   */