> I think you're missing the 2nd feature to the parent's point that I take issue with

You're right, I did gloss over that point.

I guess it should be noted that a lot of what fsck does[1] on say ext4 is something ZFS does on pool import, like replying the journal (ZIL) or trying older superblocks (uberblocks[2]). In that regard it's acting more like XFS[3] from what I can see, which just exits with 0.

[1]: https://linux.die.net/man/8/fsck.ext4

[2]: https://openzfs.github.io/openzfs-docs/man/master/8/zpool-im...

[3]: https://linux.die.net/man/8/fsck.xfs

> like replying the journal

Sigh... that's of course replaying the journal.