On 11/24/21 11:52, Kenneth Parker wrote:
Try Steve Gibson's initdisk. It claims:
"Experience has shown that USB thumb drives believed
to be dead may be brought back to life with InitDisk."
https://www.grc.com/initdisk.htm
Steve has done a lot of testing on USB flash drives and has discovered
On 24/11/2021 16:10, Curt wrote:
On 2021-11-24, piorunz wrote:
On 24/11/2021 10:04, Sven Hartge wrote:
Should I throw it away?
Yes.
Agree. I had some bad USBs, did a lot of trickery on them but never were
able to revive them and put them back to any reasonable use. Bin.
I thought I had
out on
all I/O operations, during an attempted Mint 20 Install (making me think
Mint was more Defective than it is. [Disclaimer: It does what it needs to
do, and is good for a beginner]).
Finally, I smelled a rat, aborted the Mint install and tried to read it on
a different machine.
I ran bad
On 2021-11-24, piorunz wrote:
> On 24/11/2021 10:04, Sven Hartge wrote:
>>> Should I throw it away?
>> Yes.
>
> Agree. I had some bad USBs, did a lot of trickery on them but never were
> able to revive them and put them back to any reasonable use. Bin.
>
I thought I had a bad one once but it
On 24/11/2021 10:04, Sven Hartge wrote:
Should I throw it away?
Yes.
Agree. I had some bad USBs, did a lot of trickery on them but never were
able to revive them and put them back to any reasonable use. Bin.
--
With kindest regards, Piotr.
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating
deloptes wrote:
> I'm sure there are many ideas around, but I want to hear your opinion
> so there is one USB stick that I noticed started mocking about errors when
> booting off.
> I ran badblocks (without options) and then with -s -n and this produced a
> slightly d
I'm sure there are many ideas around, but I want to hear your opinion
so there is one USB stick that I noticed started mocking about errors when
booting off.
I ran badblocks (without options) and then with -s -n and this produced a
slightly different output.
Is the output resulting from
> > Mi idea, para salir rápido del problema, es clonar con Clonezilla el dísco
> > con los problemas a otro disco ahora que todavía no he perdido ficheros.
>
> Si el disco está en mal estado y ha marcado los sectores defectuosos como
> inaccesibles, Clonezilla te dará problemas. Usa mejor
>>> y me dispongo a obtener los bloques defectuosos del disco.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> La salida del número de bloques malos no tengo claro si es la misma con
>> >>>> las dos opciones siguientes:
>> >>>>
>> >>>
disco.
> >>>>
> >>>> La salida del número de bloques malos no tengo claro si es la misma con
> >>>> las dos opciones siguientes:
> >>>>
> >>>> $ badblocks -v /dev/sda > bloques_malos.txt
> >>>> $ ba
eon Lopez escribió:
>>>
>>>> Tengo avisos de sectores con problemas enviados por el servicio smartd y
>>>> me dispongo a obtener los bloques defectuosos del disco.
>>>>
>>>> La salida del número de bloques malos no tengo claro si es
por el servicio smartd y
> >> me dispongo a obtener los bloques defectuosos del disco.
> >>
> >> La salida del número de bloques malos no tengo claro si es la misma con
> >> las dos opciones siguientes:
> >>
> >> $ badblocks -
t; dos opciones siguientes:
>
> $ badblocks -v /dev/sda > bloques_malos.txt
> $ badblocks -b 4096 -v /dev/sda > bloques_malos.txt
>
> Según la págima man badblocks por defecto trabaja con un tamaño de bloque de
> 1024.
Si tienes un formato ext3/4, con la orden «tune2fl -
Tengo avisos de sectores con problemas enviados por el servicio smartd y me
dispongo a obtener los bloques defectuosos del disco.
La salida del número de bloques malos no tengo claro si es la misma con las dos
opciones siguientes:
$ badblocks -v /dev/sda > bloques_malos.txt
$ badblocks -b 4
On 2021-07-07 19:59, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
The error is indeed quite suspicious and I'd be weary of making any
permanent changes to the drive, unless it's 100% reproducible with a
known good connection (preferably pure SATA).
I got another USB/SATA adapter and badblocks reports no problems
Cindy Sue Causey writes:
> One caveat is that the "dual" docking stations that have the clone
> ability may be easy to trigger into an irreversible clone that
> destroys data on the second hard drive. I'd seen someone complain
> about that in their product review.
I suppose. I also have one of
> I got a cheap SATA to USB external adaptor and used it to look at a 500Gb
[...]
> Might I think that there is something amiss with the USB/SATA adapter
> thing ?
In my experience, USB<->SATA adapters are not super-reliable (cheap or
not), the main problem stemming from power delivery, so you
On 7/7/21, mick crane wrote:
> On 2021-07-07 18:30, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>>> I got a cheap SATA to USB external adaptor and used it to look at a
>>> 500Gb
>> [...]
>>> Might I think that there is something amiss with the USB/SATA adapter
>>> thing ?
>>
>> In my experience, USB<->SATA adapters
On Mi, 07 iul 21, 13:30:40, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > I got a cheap SATA to USB external adaptor and used it to look at a 500Gb
> [...]
> > Might I think that there is something amiss with the USB/SATA adapter
> > thing ?
>
> In my experience, USB<->SATA adapters are not super-reliable (cheap or
On 2021-07-07 18:30, Stefan Monnier wrote:
I got a cheap SATA to USB external adaptor and used it to look at a
500Gb
[...]
Might I think that there is something amiss with the USB/SATA adapter
thing ?
In my experience, USB<->SATA adapters are not super-reliable (cheap or
not), the main
emulator.
Ran badblocks on partition which reported
"488251288 bad blocks found"
which seems excessive.
Might I think that there is something amiss with the USB/SATA adapter
thing ?
mick
It certainly could be. SATA-to-USB adapters are not made the same and
their functionali
On Wed, 07 Jul 2021 17:19:15 +0100
mick crane wrote:
> Ran badblocks on partition which reported
> "488251288 bad blocks found"
> which seems excessive.
> Might I think that there is something amiss with the USB/SATA adapter
> thing ?
Yeah, that sounds fishy. I'd run
hello,
I got a cheap SATA to USB external adaptor and used it to look at a
500Gb drive from redundant PC that I'd already got what I wanted from.
Bullseye Xfce tried to auto mount it but baulked over one directory.
I mounted partition OK in terminal emulator.
Ran badblocks on partition which
Le 04/02/2018 à 10:08, Pierre L. a écrit :
J'ai capté comment rechercher des secteurs défectueux sur un disque dur
(à plateaux/aiguilles) à l'aide de la commande badblocks, en notant leur
numéro dans un fichier texte pour utilisation ultérieure.
ex test non-destructif:
badblocks -nvs /dev/sdc
Bonjour,
Petite pêche à l'info à propos de l'utilisation de badblocks...
J'ai capté comment rechercher des secteurs défectueux sur un disque dur
(à plateaux/aiguilles) à l'aide de la commande badblocks, en notant leur
numéro dans un fichier texte pour utilisation ultérieure.
ex test non
De: Cristian Mitchell <mitchell6...@gmail.com>
Enviado: viernes, 19 de enero de 2018 12:24
Para: Lista Debian
Asunto: Re: badblocks
El 19 de enero de 2018, 12:01, Matias
Mucciolo<mmucci...@suteba.org.ar<mailto:mmucci...@suteba.org.ar>> e
[351351.670355] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdd] tag#17 CDB: Read(10) 28 00 62 ae 32
> > 80 00 00 80 00
> > [351351.670359] blk_update_request: I/O error, dev sdd, sector 1655583362
> > [351351.670478] ata4: EH complete
> >
> > Le he pasado la aplicacion "badblocks" y me d
t; [351351.670349] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdd] tag#17 Add. Sense: Unrecovered read
> error - auto reallocate failed
> [351351.670355] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdd] tag#17 CDB: Read(10) 28 00 62 ae 32
> 80 00 00 80 00
> [351351.670359] blk_update_request: I/O error, dev sdd, sector 1655583362
> [351351.670478] ata4:
t; [351351.670355] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdd] tag#17 CDB: Read(10) 28 00 62 ae 32
> 80 00 00 80 00
> [351351.670359] blk_update_request: I/O error, dev sdd, sector 1655583362
> [351351.670478] ata4: EH complete
>
> Le he pasado la aplicacion "badblocks" y me da esto:
>
> # badbl
62 ae 32
80 00 00 80 00
[351351.670359] blk_update_request: I/O error, dev sdd, sector 1655583362
[351351.670478] ata4: EH complete
Le he pasado la aplicacion "badblocks" y me da esto:
# badblocks -nsv /dev/sdd
Revisando los bloques dañados en modo lectura-escritura no destructivo
Del b
El 2014-12-18 08:38, Flako escribió:
El día 18 de diciembre de 2014, 11:11, Juan Pablo Jaramillo Pineda
juanpablo...@gmail.com escribió:
El 17/12/14 a las 21:13, Esteban Monge escribió:
Siempre ando buscando como hacer algo en internet y nunca aporto
nada.
Acá mis tips para usar badblocks
El 17/12/14 a las 21:13, Esteban Monge escribió:
Siempre ando buscando como hacer algo en internet y nunca aporto nada.
Acá mis tips para usar badblocks, esta herramienta permite chequear si
un disco tiene errores.
http://www.emonge.com/doku.php/badblocks
Hola,
Precisamente hoy me
El día 18 de diciembre de 2014, 11:11, Juan Pablo Jaramillo Pineda
juanpablo...@gmail.com escribió:
El 17/12/14 a las 21:13, Esteban Monge escribió:
Siempre ando buscando como hacer algo en internet y nunca aporto nada.
Acá mis tips para usar badblocks, esta herramienta permite chequear si
El Thursday, 18 December del 2014 a las 09:11:41AM, Juan Pablo Jaramillo Pineda
escribi�:
El 17/12/14 a las 21:13, Esteban Monge escribió:
Siempre ando buscando como hacer algo en internet y nunca aporto nada.
Acá mis tips para usar badblocks, esta herramienta permite chequear si
un
Siempre ando buscando como hacer algo en internet y nunca aporto nada.
Acá mis tips para usar badblocks, esta herramienta permite chequear si
un disco tiene errores.
http://www.emonge.com/doku.php/badblocks
--
Esteban Monge Marín
http://www.emonge.com
e...@emonge.com
mongejimene...@gmail.com
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 12:08:35AM +, Hendrik Boom wrote:
The option -t random specifies that the block should be filled with a
random bit pattern.
Now, just how random is that bit pattern.
Does it choose a random byte and fill the entire hard drive with it?
If I'm reading the
The option -t random specifies that the block should be filled with a
random bit pattern.
Now, just how random is that bit pattern.
Does it choose a random byte and fill the entire hard drive with it?
Does it make up a random disk block and write that to the whole disk?
Or does each block get
On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 08:40:55 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
Camaleón wrote:
http://www.amazon.com/Iomega-Prestige-Portable-SuperSpeed-35194/dp/
B004NIDHXC
That's exactly the kind of device I would never ever buy O:-)
Do you have a make and model of hard drive that you would
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:50:09PM -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
developing bad blocks. They are usually at room temperature (no air
conditioning), partitioned via cfdisk + mke2fs.
I think room temperature is a vague term considering the temperature
range which occurs in each country.
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:35:42 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
Camaleón wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 11:07:15 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
One of the partitions on my hard drive has badblocks. I did a
$sudo e2fsck -c -c -f -v /dev/sdb7
on it and it found 757 badblocks
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 11:07:15 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
One of the partitions on my hard drive has badblocks. I did a
$sudo e2fsck -c -c -f -v /dev/sdb7
on it and it found 757 badblocks. The partition itself is 100 GB and
only 18 GB of it is filled. Now my question is how
Camaleón wrote:
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 11:07:15 -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
One of the partitions on my hard drive has badblocks. I did a
$sudo e2fsck -c -c -f -v /dev/sdb7
on it and it found 757 badblocks. The partition itself is 100 GB and
only 18 GB of it is filled. Now my
On Thursday 30 August 2012 19:35:42 Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
This one is very slim and does not even have an external case.
http://www.amazon.com/Iomega-Prestige-Portable-
SuperSpeed-35194/dp/B004NIDHXC
Yes, it has got a case. The case is black metal.
quote from Amazon site referenced
--- On Thu, 8/30/12, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi raju.mailingli...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess iOmega drives are not very stable.
I guess iOmega drives are not very stable.
I have several external drives from iOmega that are a few years old. But the
drives inside the enclosure are Western Digital.
Go Linux wrote:
--- On Thu, 8/30/12, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi raju.mailingli...@gmail.com
wrote: I guess iOmega drives are not very stable.
I guess iOmega drives are not very stable.
I have several external drives from iOmega that are a few years old. But
the drives inside the enclosure are
Use o, fsck, mais apenas é bom lembrar que falha física no HD não pode ser
reparada via Software, o setor danifica será apenas marcado, de forma que o
SO não irá gravar neste bloco.
Em 10 de dezembro de 2011 15:55, Samuel Andrade Teixeira
kerne...@yahoo.com.br escreveu:
Boa tarde, pessoal!
Você pode usar tbm o badblocks para verificar algum setor defeituoso.
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 19:54:59 -0200
Sinval Júnior sinva...@gmail.com wrote:
Use o, fsck, mais apenas é bom lembrar que falha física no HD não pode ser
reparada via Software, o setor danifica será apenas marcado, de forma que
I bought a 60G disk and test it with badblocks
badblocks -vws /dev/hdb
6 hours has passed and it's still running
I can no longer wait and press Ctrl+c
It have finished with 3 test patterns
It says nothing about whether bad blocks are found or not
I have read its manual and get no answer about my
I bought a 60G disk and test it with badblocks
badblocks -vws /dev/hdb
6 hours has passed and it's still running
I can no longer wait and press Ctrl+c
It have finished with 3 test patterns
It says nothing about whether bad blocks are found or not
I have read its manual and get no answer
Long Wind:
I bought a 60G disk and test it with badblocks
badblocks -vws /dev/hdb
6 hours has passed and it's still running
I can no longer wait and press Ctrl+c
It have finished with 3 test patterns
It says nothing about whether bad blocks are found or not
It would have told you
On Friday 23 September 2011 13:07:54 Long Wind wrote:
I bought a 60G disk and test it with badblocks
badblocks -vws /dev/hdb
6 hours has passed and it's still running
I can no longer wait and press Ctrl+c
It have finished with 3 test patterns
It says nothing about whether bad blocks
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com wrote:
You didn't let Badblocks finish! The longest it has taken when I have used it
was 13 hours - and this was a while ago, so probably a 40G HDD.
Let Badblocks finish, however long it takes, and if it still gives no error
message
Long Wind (longwind2...@gmail.com on 2011-09-23 20:07 +0800):
I bought a 60G disk and test it with badblocks
badblocks -vws /dev/hdb
6 hours has passed and it's still running
That can happen. My last disk was a 2TB low-rpm disk. It took badblocks
over 50 hours to complete the check.
I
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 14:09:22 +, T o n g wrote:
$ badblocks -p 99 -c 9 -wv /dev/$tdev badblocks: No such file or
directory while trying to determine device size
The keyword here is newly created partition.
that was lenny, rebooted into squeeze and all are fine:
The key here is reboot
On jan. 18, 21:40, Towncat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On jan. 12, 22:20, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/12/08 11:40, Towncat wrote:
Hi,
I did a
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
Why? Don't you trust brand new disk drives?
Well, you do have a point
On jan. 12, 22:20, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/12/08 11:40, Towncat wrote:
Hi,
I did a
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
Why? Don't you trust brand new disk drives?
Well, you do have a point... But then, this is the only time I can do
this safely. When
Hi,
I did a
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for
approx 18 hours and is just over three thirds. Is this really supposed
to be so slow, or is there something wrong? The machine is a Core Duo
1,6, 2GB memory.
Tc
On 01/12/2008 11:40 AM, Towncat wrote:
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for
approx 18 hours and is just over three thirds. Is this really supposed
to be so slow, or is there something wrong? The machine is a Core
On jan. 12, 19:20, Michael Shuler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/12/2008 11:40 AM, Towncat wrote:
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for
approx 18 hours and is just over three thirds. Is this really supposed
On 01/12/08 11:40, Towncat wrote:
Hi,
I did a
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
Why? Don't you trust brand new disk drives?
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for
approx 18 hours and is just over three thirds. Is this really supposed
to be so
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 03:11:57PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 01/12/08 11:40, Towncat wrote:
Hi,
I did a
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
Why? Don't you trust brand new disk drives?
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for
approx 18 hours
On 01/12/08 15:29, Alex Samad wrote:
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 03:11:57PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 01/12/08 11:40, Towncat wrote:
Hi,
I did a
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
Why? Don't you trust brand new disk drives?
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 09:40:36AM -0800, Towncat wrote:
I did a
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for
approx 18 hours and is just over three thirds. Is this really supposed
to be so slow
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 11:14:13AM -0800, Towncat wrote:
On jan. 12, 19:20, Michael Shuler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/12/2008 11:40 AM, Towncat wrote:
/sbin/badblocks -c 10240 -w -t random -v /dev/sda2
where sda2 is a 320 gb partition. The process has been running for
approx 18
ola todos
estou com uns hds com badblocks.todos hds usava win antes. :)
ai queria saber como poderia colocar o debian e ele checar os badblocks e
assim não usar?
pesquisando achei isso aqui...
Por fim, aconselho uma verficação no HD por blocos ruins (bad
blocks), fazendo uso da opção
Assunto: debian em hd com badblocks (como marcar o badblocks para o debian não
usar)
ola todos
estou com uns hds com badblocks.todos hds usava win antes. :)
ai queria saber como poderia colocar o debian e ele checar os badblocks e assim
não usar?
pesquisando achei isso aqui...
Por fim
e uso do Badblocks
http://www.ime.usp.br/~ueda/ldoc/badblk.htmlhttp://www.ime.usp.br/%7Eueda/ldoc/badblk.html
o fsck
http://www.boadica.com.br/layoutdica.asp?codigo=488
ou de outros...
aqui um hd que parava na instalação em 29% em um arquivo de
documentação...agora ele foi ao 70%~80% de
Leo la pagina man de badblocks y dice que busca bloques malos, pero no
dice si los marca para que no se vuelvan a usar.
Lo que quiero saber es si badblocks marca los sectores malos, o si esto se
hace con e2fsck -c
Gracias.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
El 23/02/07 10:54, Mario Carugno escribió:
Lo que quiero saber es si badblocks marca los sectores malos, o si esto se
hace con e2fsck -c
No. Quién los marca, es el badblocks. Esto sí, si lo haces como write/read,
pero usando el 'non-destructive
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 06:54:56AM -0300, Mario Carugno wrote:
Leo la pagina man de badblocks y dice que busca bloques malos, pero no
dice si los marca para que no se vuelvan a usar.
Olá!
En el manual de 'badblocks' (`man badblocks`), están las
respuestas. Sin opciones, muestra a la salida
El 23/02/07, Mario Carugno [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
Leo la pagina man de badblocks y dice que busca bloques malos, pero no
dice si los marca para que no se vuelvan a usar.
Lo que quiero saber es si badblocks marca los sectores malos, o si esto se
hace con e2fsck -c
la combinacion del fsck
Hola llista,
tinc un problema amb un disc dur que falla, i després de fer :
# fsck.vfat /dev/hdb1 -t -r
dosfsck 2.11, 12 Mar 2005, FAT32, LFN
/dev/hdb1: 12241 files, 1191758/4242097 clusters
No sembla que hi aparegui cap error (?!).
Fa temps ja hi vaig passar el badblocks, però no recordo si va
Hallo,
Am Die, 05 Sep 2006, Markus Raab schrieb:
Grund: Eine Festplatte hat einen internen Speicher wo eine bestimmte Anzahl
von kaputten Blöcke transparent versteckt werden. D.h. erst nach einer
gewissen Anzahl von Blöcken merkt man etwas. Dann ist es aber schon
ziemlich fatal und viele weitere
Roland M. Kruggel wrote:
Hallo Liste
ich habe eine defekte Platte. Filesystem ist XFS. Einige Verzeichnisse
können nicht mehr gelesen werden. Ein check mit badblocks ergab eine
Liste mit ca. 30 einträgen. Also nicht sooo viel.
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte
Roland M. Kruggel wrote:
Hallo Liste
ich habe eine defekte Platte. Filesystem ist XFS. Einige Verzeichnisse
können nicht mehr gelesen werden. Ein check mit badblocks ergab eine
Liste mit ca. 30 einträgen. Also nicht sooo viel.
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 21:17:25 +0200, Roland M. Kruggel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ich habe eine defekte Platte. Filesystem ist XFS.
Ist dieses System jemals mit einem 2.6.17.x Kernel mit kleinem x
gelaufen? Wenn ja, warst Du Opfer eines Kernelbugs und die Platte ist
nicht so kaputt wie sie scheinen
nicht so kaputt wie sie scheinen mag.
Ich mag mich irren, aber imo kümmert sich badblocks nicht um das
Dateisystem oder Fehler darin.
Schönen Gruß,
Wolf
--
Büroschimpfwort des Tages: Kopierversager - Kollege mit den scheußlichsten
Fehlkopien der ganzen Abteilung. (Sven-Lukas Müller
Roland M. Kruggel wrote:
ich habe eine defekte Platte. Filesystem ist XFS. Einige Verzeichnisse
können nicht mehr gelesen werden. Ein check mit badblocks ergab eine
Liste mit ca. 30 einträgen. Also nicht sooo viel.
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte sagen das sie
Am Mittwoch 06 September 2006 00:47 schrieb Micha Beyer:
Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 21:17 schrieb Roland M. Kruggel:
ich habe eine defekte Platte. Filesystem ist XFS. Einige
Verzeichnisse können nicht mehr gelesen werden. Ein check mit
badblocks ergab eine Liste mit ca. 30 einträgen
Sandro Frenzel wrote:
Wieso denn? Sagen wir mal die Platte hat durch einen Stromausfall paar
fehlerhafte Sektoren bekommen...so 50 Stück, die in einem Bereich
liegen.
Warum kann man dem OS nicht sagen: Schreib dort nichts mehr drauf.
Dann ist doch eigentlich alles in Ordnung. Ich erkenn
On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 01:20:07PM +0200, Sandro Frenzel wrote:
Wieso denn? Sagen wir mal die Platte hat durch einen Stromausfall paar
fehlerhafte Sektoren bekommen...so 50 Stück, die in einem Bereich
liegen.
Warum kann man dem OS nicht sagen: Schreib dort nichts mehr drauf.
Man kann.
Hallo all,
danke für die vielen Tips. Eigentlich war es ja nur ein Tip. Ich habe
ihn befolgt. Nun dreht sich eine neue 160GB in meinem Server.
Alle anderen Experimente waren mir wirklich zu gefährlich.
--
cu
Roland Kruggel mailto: rk.liste at bbf7.de
System: Intel, Debian etch, 2.6.16.16,
Sandro Frenzel wrote:
Wieso denn? Sagen wir mal die Platte hat durch einen Stromausfall
paar fehlerhafte Sektoren bekommen...
Wie soll das vor sich gehen? Heutige HDs parken automatisch.
so 50 Stück, die in einem Bereich liegen.
Dann ersetzt der Controller in der Festplatte diese Sektoren
Am Mittwoch, 6. September 2006 14:24 schrieb Roland M. Kruggel:
danke für die vielen Tips. Eigentlich war es ja nur ein Tip. Ich habe
ihn befolgt. Nun dreht sich eine neue 160GB in meinem Server.
IMHO das Beste was Du tun konntest.
Alle anderen Experimente waren mir wirklich zu gefährlich.
Hallo Liste
ich habe eine defekte Platte. Filesystem ist XFS. Einige Verzeichnisse
können nicht mehr gelesen werden. Ein check mit badblocks ergab eine
Liste mit ca. 30 einträgen. Also nicht sooo viel.
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte sagen das sie
diese Blöcke nicht
Roland M. Kruggel schrieb:
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte sagen das sie
diese Blöcke nicht mehr benutzen soll?
Normalerweise erledigt die Platte selber das Management von defekten
Blöcken. Nur wenn die das nicht mehr hinbekommt bekommst du die zu sehen.
Wie ist
Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 21:23 schrieb Edward von Flottwell:
Roland M. Kruggel schrieb:
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte sagen
das sie diese Blöcke nicht mehr benutzen soll?
Normalerweise erledigt die Platte selber das Management von
defekten Blöcken. Nur wenn
Roland M. Kruggel schrieb:
'smartctrl -a /dev/hdb5' liefer jede menge Fehler. Was interessiert
speziell?
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 ?
Ach ja, kann sein, dass du -F samsung oder samsung2 angeben musst.
Ich habs mir fast gedacht. Aber diese Woche bekomme ich keine mehr.
Roland M. Kruggel wrote:
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte sagen das
sie diese Blöcke nicht mehr benutzen soll?
Die Platte ist eine 80GB Samsung. Daten sind natürlich gesichert.
Wenn die Blöcke als Defekt bis auf deine Ebene durchkommen, ist
der Vorrat an
Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 21:43 schrieb Bjoern Schliessmann:
Roland M. Kruggel wrote:
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte sagen
das sie diese Blöcke nicht mehr benutzen soll?
Die Platte ist eine 80GB Samsung. Daten sind natürlich gesichert.
Wenn die Blöcke als
Am Dienstag, 5. September 2006 21:17 schrieb Roland M. Kruggel:
ich habe eine defekte Platte. Filesystem ist XFS. Einige Verzeichnisse
können nicht mehr gelesen werden. Ein check mit badblocks ergab eine
Liste mit ca. 30 einträgen. Also nicht sooo viel.
Du liebst also das Spiel mit dem Feuer
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Roland M. Kruggel wrote:
'smartctrl -a /dev/hdb5' liefer jede menge Fehler. Was interessiert
speziell?
ich denke, Reallocated_Sector_Ct sollte die anzahl bereits neu
vergebener sektoren sein, irgenwann hat die platte aber keine mehr frei.
evtl. hilft folgendes howto:
Roland M. Kruggel schrieb:
Aber wie mache ich jetzt weiter? Wie kann ich der Platte sagen das sie
diese Blöcke nicht mehr benutzen soll?
Lowlevel-Format mit dem Tool des Herstellers.
Nützt aber nur dann was, wenn die Platte ansonsten in Ordnung ist.
Tauchen danach wieder Fehler auf,
Hi everybody,
I have recently heard strange noises from one of my IDE harddrives
and have then run
fsck.ext2 -c -c /dev/hdb1
so that badblocks is executed. From the output in syslog I see that
it has found 402 bad blocks, but only some 27 are listed in the
filesystem:
dumpe2fs -b /dev
Kaspar Fischer,
it has found 402 bad blocks, but only some 27 are listed in the
Is this normal? Are 402 bad blocks too many for ext2/3?
402 bad blocks are 402 too many any way. It means that your drive has
started failing and you should replace it.
--
regards,
Christopher Pharo Glæserud
Le dimanche 03 septembre 2006 à 16:30 +0200, Kaspar Fischer a écrit :
Hi everybody,
I have recently heard strange noises from one of my IDE harddrives
and have then run
fsck.ext2 -c -c /dev/hdb1
so that badblocks is executed. From the output in syslog I see that
it has found 402 bad
On Sep 3, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
Independently of whatever any tool is telling you, consider this sound
as the clock ticking the doom of your drive. Backup now.
T.
On Sep 3, 2006, at 4:57 PM, Christopher Pharo Glæserud wrote:
402 bad blocks are 402 too many any way. It
comme tel avec badblocks et reiserfsck de façon à ce
qu'ils ne soient plus utilisés ou, à défaut avec badblocks et mkfs.reiserfs.
Merci.
--
Lisez la FAQ de la liste avant de poser une question :
http://wiki.debian.net/?DebianFrench
Vous pouvez aussi ajouter le mot ``spam'' dans vos champs
marquer les
secteurs défectueux comme tel avec badblocks et reiserfsck de façon à ce
qu'ils ne soient plus utilisés ou, à défaut avec badblocks et
mkfs.reiserfs.
Merci.
Salut,
j'ai un peu le même genre de pb sur un disque : va voir cet article,
paru dans le numéro 68 de Linux Magazine :
http
Hallo,
Gibts eine Möglichkeit, die Platte/Partition - ohne das
Filesystem zu beschädigen - nach badblocks zu scannen und die
gefundenen dann dem Filesystem mitzuteilen ?
fsck.ext2 -cck /dev/foobar
Aber lies vorher nochmal die manpage.
Grüße,
Moritz
--
Moritz Lenz
http://moritz.faui2k3
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
