I see that if you run fsck on a filesystem with SU+J turned-on, fsck
asks whether you want to use the journal.
This causes a problem when running fsck -y. The traditional meaning of
this command was: do a thorough, unconditional, non-interactive check;
but now SU+J filesystems only get a journal
2012 amd64
gpart show identifies it as ad1 with partition 2 as type
freebsd-ufs and label g_user.
However:
fsck /dev/ad1p2
fsck: could not determine filesystem type
Adding -t ufs produces:
huff@ fsck -t ufs /ad1p2
** /dev/ad1p2
** Last Mounted on /usr
** Phase 1 - Check
to
a system running:
FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0: Sun Dec 30 12:52:09 EST 2012 amd64
gpart show identifies it as ad1 with partition 2 as type
freebsd-ufs and label g_user.
However:
fsck /dev/ad1p2
fsck: could not determine filesystem type
Adding -t ufs produces:
huff
--On November 18, 2012 10:38:43 AM -0500 Lynn Steven Killingsworth
blue.seahorse.syndic...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi FreeBSD -
On my PC-BSD 9.1 RC3 I need to run fsck on my internal storage drive.
I would like to use I think:
fsck -y -F -t ufs /dev
The question is what should I place
* PLEASE RERUN FSCK *
Script done on Wed Sep 19 04:17:27 2012
Would this indicate a software bug, or is my Western Digital Caviar Green
3 TB hard drive failing?
Either something was referencing sectors off the end of the disc,
or the drive is failing. I'd be inclined
to do
there. Choosing reset did not provide clean file-system unmount.
I had to run fsck /dev/ada0p9 on the reboot, got unreadable sectors and
eventually a prompt to run fsck again. I did this but got to an infinite loop,
where I got the same prompt again to run fsck again, with the same
, 4638292 used, 21162419 free (61643 frags, 2637597 blocks,
0.2% fragmentation)
* FILE SYSTEM STILL DIRTY *
* PLEASE RERUN FSCK *
Script done on Wed Sep 19 04:17:27 2012
Would this indicate a software bug, or is my Western Digital Caviar Green
3 TB hard drive failing
Hi,
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 06:05:06 -0400
Thomas Mueller muelle...@insightbb.com wrote:
Script started on Wed Sep 19 04:15:02 2012
fsck_ffs /dev/ada0p9
just to make sure: the partition was not mounted when you started fsck?
Now I wonder if the file system is really fixed, with possibly some
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 23:53:55 -0600, Gary Aitken wrote:
Hmmm:
acpi0: 030811 XSDT1017 on motherboard
acpi0: Power Button (fixed)
acpi0: reservation of fec0, 1000 (3) failed
acpi0: reservation of fee0, 1000 (3) failed
acpi0: reservation of ffb8, 8 (3) failed
acpi0:
On 18/08/2012 07:09, Polytropon wrote:
A can only guess: It probably means that the button is fixed
(mounted) in the machine, e. g. at the front panel.
From
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Configuration_and_Power_Interface :
ACPI-compliant systems interact with hardware through
When my system hangs and I have to force it to power cycle, I sometimes have
some fsck issues. So some questions:
1. It appears to me that the file system (ufs) is not writing stuff out when
things are idle. If I do a sync manually and leave the machine idle and it
crashes later, it comes
, it often
comes up needing fsck. Is there a way to configure the filesystem
to cache but still write cached stuff at low priority?
Note that even if the OS orders a data write, it's up to the
disk driver to actually tell the disk to do it. And the disk
then _has_ to do it. There is no real
option? How
does that work? sounds like magic of some sort... Or is this a whole login
sequence with the shutdown at the end?
Reboot did a deferred fsck.
Is this intended? Personally, I'd rather wait some time to boot
in a fully checked file system environment then dealing
... Or is this a whole login
sequence with the shutdown at the end?
No, it's a system action using ACPI. No magic involved. :-)
Reboot did a deferred fsck.
Is this intended? Personally, I'd rather wait some time to boot
in a fully checked file system environment then dealing
On 08/17/12 21:17, Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:44:10 -0600, Gary Aitken wrote:
On 08/17/12 19:05, Polytropon wrote:
2. When my machine hung (could not rlogin or ping), I powered
off and rebooted.
Does the machine have a soft power button and it is configured
to issue a
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 22:14:47 -0600, Gary Aitken wrote:
On 08/17/12 21:17, Polytropon wrote:
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:44:10 -0600, Gary Aitken wrote:
On 08/17/12 19:05, Polytropon wrote:
2. When my machine hung (could not rlogin or ping), I powered
off and rebooted.
Does the machine
On 08/17/12 22:23, Polytropon wrote:
Also check the BIOS setup. In most cases, the default configuration
will assign the button press to a soft power down, raising the
proper signal via ACPI. You can also check dmesg's output:
acpi_button0: Power Button on acpi0
acpi_button1:
Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
MSDOS/PCDOS had no _documented_ functions to directly access the
disks, bypassing the file system, but the functions _did_ exist.
I'm sure you can provide the DOS 'function number' for those calls,
and cites to published data confirming.
They
I could have provided specifics 25 years ago :) when I was involved
with this stuff on a daily basis. I have no idea whether it was
same as me. still it is off topic.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Regarding the security of various methods of deleting data, I just saw in
Office Depot's online ad for the coming week, which is the reason I couldn't
post this any earlier:
Need to discard an old PC but worried about protecting your identity?
Let us securely erase your personal files and
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 05:52:17 -0400
From: Thomas Mueller muelle...@insightbb.com
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
Regarding the security of various methods of deleting data, I just saw in
Office Depot's online ad for the coming week, which is the reason I
couldn't post this any
Personally, I've always used a product from http://www.jetico.com/.
On Sunday, July 22, 2012 at 17:06:04 UTC, g...@ross.cx confabulated:
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 17:08:56 +0200, Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote:
On 22/07/2012 16:01, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
'dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=1M'
On 22/07/2012 17:14, Polytropon wrote:
Furthermore, in your example using Cygnwin's dd _on_ the disk
Cygnwin is currently running from, and the Windows it runs
on too, doesn't seem like a very good idea. I assume it will
result in a bluescreen soon and a _partially_ erased disk.
Sorry, I
From woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl Sun Jul 22 10:03:46 2012
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 17:01:59 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
To: Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk
cc: Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck
From: Polytropon free...@edvax.de
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 18:14:02 +0200
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
By the way, I remember I had a DD.EXE program on my old DOS
system. I'm not sure if such a tool could operate on devices
(instead of filesystem-based representations as drive
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Sun Jul 22 07:22:29 2012
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:19:43 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
To: Thomas Mueller muelle...@insightbb.com
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
Let us
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Sun Jul 22 09:19:24 2012
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 15:16:01 +0100
From: Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk
To: Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
On 22/07/2012 11:38, Robert
...@mail.r-bonomi.com
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
On 22/07/2012 17:14, Polytropon wrote:
Furthermore, in your example using Cygnwin's dd _on_ the disk
Cygnwin is currently running from, and the Windows it runs
on too, doesn't seem like a very good idea. I assume it will
result
From: Michael Ross g...@ross.cx
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 19:06:04 +0200
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 17:08:56 +0200, Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote:
Microsoft's format.exe can zero a volume, at least in the newer (2008)
versions:
/p:passes : Zeros every sector on the volume for the number of
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 16:01:41 -0500 (CDT)
Robert Bonomi articulated:
I haven't had occasion to dissect a copy of format in years, I don't
know if it still defaults to one write attemptto every sector on the
disk.
I read on the MS TechNet several years ago that it attempted three
writes per
provided to the user, by the O/S
can we finally stop this off topic thread?
it was about fsck on FAT32 filesystem UNDER FREEBSD (because it is in
freebsd-questions).
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 23:01:41 +0200, Robert Bonomi
bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
I haven't had occasion to dissect a copy of format in years, I don't know
if it still defaults to one write attemptto every sector on the disk.
By default in Windows Vista, the format command writes zeros
On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 15:31:51 -0500 (CDT)
Robert Bonomi articulated:
Yes, in theory, they _could_ learn everything they need to know to do
it themselves, but the list of things that a 'know nothing' Windows
user has to dig out, understand, and _use_, is incredibly long and
daunting.
I know
Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
MSDOS/PCDOS had -no- O/S functions to directly access actual disk
devices. The ONLY fuctionality provided to the user, by the O/S
was filesystem based access. To get 'raw' device access, one had
to bypass the O/S entirely, and use direct BIOS
From per...@pluto.rain.com Sun Jul 22 22:15:48 2012
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 03:10:40 -0700
From: per...@pluto.rain.com
To: bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
MSDOS/PCDOS had
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Thu Jul 19 03:21:28 2012
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:18:43 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
To: Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
entitled
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:18:48 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
Indeed.
But getting GELI certified and approved by the relevant
institutions and agencies isn't that easy either. Yet without
no idea what are you
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 05:12:14 -0500 (CDT)
Robert Bonomi articulated:
Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
entitled to have opinions, *BUT* the Gospel According to
Wojciech is -not- 'the answer' for everybody, in every
situation. *IF* you ever learn that,
Seems like you
It seems like all you know how to do is engage in ignorant, uninformed,
personal attacks/insults.
if you would read more carefully then you will see clearly that i am
personally attacked most often.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Seriously though, I wish people would stop feeding this TROLL. There is
absolutely no upside to it. As has been stated so eloquently many times
before, Never argue with a fool - they will drag you down to their
level, then beat you with experience.
so why you are continuing that thread?
People
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
All I'm going to say is:
1) There's a _reason_ the gov't requires hard drives with anthing higher
than 'somewhat' classified data on them to be =physically= destroyed
before leving the secure area.
regulations have been tightened further recently as to mandate
sector-level encryption of the hard disks as well, just to be on the
sure(rer) side. At least in certain particularly sensitive areas.
which may be a proof that governments know backdoors alloving recovery
from encrypted drives
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
regulations have been tightened further recently as to mandate
sector-level encryption of the hard disks as well, just to be on the
sure(rer) side. At least in certain particularly sensitive areas.
which
Indeed.
But getting GELI certified and approved by the relevant
institutions and agencies isn't that easy either. Yet without
no idea what are you talking about. For your own use you don't need
anyones certification. You need safe solution. geli just do this.
As for any government agencies
developed countries.
Not really sure what you wanted to imply,
as SMB looks like americanism to me.
as well as SOHO.
As not the first time, some people here when lacking arguments say i work
for larger company. We have more servers in one place.
Esp. second is nopt something to be proud
1) There's a _reason_ the gov't requires hard drives with anthing higher
than 'somewhat' classified data on them to be =physically= destroyed
before leving the secure area.
no. for modern hard drives it was already proved that
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/disk bs=1m
is enough to make data
entitled to have opinions, *BUT* the Gospel According to Wojciech is -not-
'the answer' for everybody, in every situation. *IF* you ever learn that,
Seems like you have 45 years of experience in words. nothing more.
Aggression is normal today from such people, that have good position in
some
Jerry jerry at seibercom.net writes:
...
I couldn't have said it better myself. Wojciech lives in his own little
world, which is fine as long as he doesn't try to visit mine. He sounds
like he works at a small Polish SMB, more commonly referred to as a
SOHO in more developed countries. I
Otherwise, you may run the danger of building a wall around yourself.
everyone should judge by his/her own brain which opinions are right.
Actually in every moment i try to encourage EVERYONE to turn on his/her
brain that we all have but rarely use.
To be ever able to use ones brain
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:15:17 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar articulated:
1) There's a _reason_ the gov't requires hard drives with anthing
higher than 'somewhat' classified data on them to be =physically=
destroyed before leving the secure area.
no. for modern hard drives it was already
for very old drives it may not
Would you be so kind as to point out the proof of that statement?
sorry but i didn't save that article on hard drive. So no proof if you
don't believe me i've actually read it.
The main point is that you have
- track
- intra-track gap
- finite precision of
This topic went totally off, but anyway there are interesting bits,
do you say that e.g. Gutmann method is totally unneeded?
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/fsck-on-FAT32-filesystem-tp5727015p5728126.html
Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:49:50 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar articulated:
Otherwise, you may run the danger of building a wall around
yourself.
everyone should judge by his/her own brain which opinions are right.
Actually in every moment i try to encourage EVERYONE to turn on
his/her
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MFM_AFM_JANUSZ_REBIS_INFOCENTRE_PL_HDD_MAGNETIC_MEMORY_EVOLUTION.png
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/fsck-on-FAT32-filesystem-tp5727015p5728126.html
Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com
can add FreeBSD knowledge to their CV.
That statement goes beyond stupid. At some point, everyone is a
You proved well enough about what stupid means.
esp your mail carmel...@hotmail.com
that's truly a mail address that System Admin should be proud of ;)
At least you don't worry about
Wojciech Puchar wojtek at wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl writes:
...
This should clear up some confusion. Will it ?
Disk Wiping One Pass Is Enough
http://www.anti-forensics.com/disk-wiping-one-pass-is-enough
...
---
http://www.anti-forensics.com/disk-wiping-one-pass-is-enough-part-2-this-time-wi
and just as good as random
scrubs.
That's still makes a robust procedure, even If
overkill and dated (which isn't exactly bad
thing).
Thanks for replies.
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/fsck-on-FAT32-filesystem-tp5727015p5728161.html
Sent from the freebsd
On 19/07/2012 09:15, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
no. for modern hard drives it was already proved that
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/disk bs=1m
is enough to make data unreadable.
for very old drives it may not
How about data stored in remapped sectors, or any flash cache?
The Secure Erase command
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Carmel wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:15:17 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar articulated:
1) There's a _reason_ the gov't requires hard drives with anthing
higher than 'somewhat' classified data on them to be =physically=
destroyed before leving the secure area.
no. for
How about data stored in remapped sectors, or any flash cache?
how about being able to restore random 0.1% of former user data.
Not really useful.
Flash cache is quite recent idea, nobody serious would like to scrap such
a drive instead of reuse.
agencies recover overwritten data? at
http://www.nber.org/sys-admin/overwritten-data-gutmann.html
at first - it should be asked can agencies recover your data without
being overwritten first.
just use geli(8)
then second problem is even less problem.
Finally use geli (or similar method)
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:26:57 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote:
agencies recover overwritten data? at
http://www.nber.org/sys-admin/overwritten-data-gutmann.html
at first - it should be asked can agencies recover your data without
being overwritten first.
Sure, because it's stored
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Tue Jul 17 12:06:29 2012
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 19:02:19 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
To: Robert Bonomi bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 07:47:02 -0500 (CDT)
Robert Bonomi articulated:
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
Surely SpinRite is more clever than that,
i would bet otherwise. simple tools and free tools are always
better
You continue to demonstrate that you don't
Hi Robert,
cc questions@
cc postmaster@ (***)
What I am is an information systems professional with 45 years experience.
Interesting reading that your prior post.
'Edge of the track, turn up the op. amps'
has been an interesting technique for decades, I
-offtopic-
(...)
like he works at a small Polish SMB, more
commonly referred to as a SOHO in more
developed countries.
Not really sure what you wanted to imply,
as SMB looks like americanism to me.
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/fsck-on-FAT32
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:58:22 +0200
From: Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
Hi Robert, cc questions@ cc postmaster@ (***)
What I am is an information systems professional with 45 years
experience.
Interesting reading that your prior post
It appears I was mistaken.
Care to elaborate? Most people on this list seem to speak highly of SpinRite.
first - it is off topic.
second - because all commercial software like that are designed for
uneducated user, mostly try to automatically do everything. Which is a
danger not help.
On 07/17/2012 11:36 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
It appears I was mistaken.
Care to elaborate? Most people on this list seem to speak highly of
SpinRite.
first - it is off topic.
second - because all commercial software like that are designed for
uneducated user, mostly try to automatically
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:36:07 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar articulated:
It appears I was mistaken.
Care to elaborate? Most people on this list seem to speak highly of
SpinRite.
first - it is off topic.
second - because all commercial software like that are designed for
uneducated
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Mon Jul 16 01:17:33 2012
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 08:15:13 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
To: Polytropon free...@edvax.de
Cc: FreeBSD freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
read
Surely SpinRite is more clever than that,
i would bet otherwise. simple tools and free tools are always better
You continue to demonsteate that you don't know what you don't know.
are you another sponsored by some recovery tool commercial producer?
read attempts. In worst case, there will be gaps in the
result.
Surely SpinRite is more clever than that,
i would bet otherwise. simple tools and free tools are always better
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Adam Vande More wrote:
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
totally in error. SpinRite will attempt to read a damage sector up to
2000 times and through different algorithms determine what is most
man dd
Even
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Sun Jul 15 16:31:45 2012
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 23:29:39 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
To: FreeBSD freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
totally in error. SpinRite will attempt
: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
totally in error. SpinRite will attempt to read a damage sector
up to 2000 times and through different algorithms determine what
is most
man dd
conv=sync,noerror
This is *precisely* why dd is _grossly_inferior_ to
professional-grade tools like
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Jerry je...@seibercom.net wrote:
This is *precisely* why dd is _grossly_inferior_ to
professional-grade tools like Spinrite.
With the settings the resident infallible expert on everything
*SNORT* recommends, dd will make _one_ attempt to read each
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:04:31 -0500, Robert Bonomi
bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
This is *precisely* why dd is _grossly_inferior_ to professional-grade
tools like Spinrite.
I bet you are a big fan of homeopathic treatments too, aren't you?
___
On 07/16/2012 10:10, Mark Felder wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:04:31 -0500, Robert Bonomi
bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com wrote:
This is *precisely* why dd is _grossly_inferior_ to professional-grade
tools like Spinrite.
I bet you are a big fan of homeopathic treatments too, aren't you?
`
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 12:03:37 -0500
From: Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
SpinWrong is a scam, Gibson is a fraud, and this conversation is pure
marketing gibberish. I thought most had overcome this credulity years ago.
It appears I
From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Mon Jul 16 12:12:47 2012
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 12:10:34 -0500
From: Mark Felder f...@feld.me
Subject: Re: fsck on FAT32 filesystem?
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:04:31 -0500, Robert Bonomi
bon...@mail.r-bonomi.com
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Adam Vande More wrote:
SpinWrong is a scam, Gibson is a fraud, and this conversation is pure
marketing gibberish. I thought most had overcome this credulity years
ago. It appears I was mistaken.
Care to elaborate? Most people on this list seem to speak highly of
SpinWrong is a scam, Gibson is a fraud, and this conversation is pure
marketing gibberish.
maybe you exaggerate but this is what i feel in that discussion. instead
of help - seemed like marketing.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
not in the vicinity of the root directory. But I am
old school, and paranoid, so I'd really like to run the FAT32 equivalent
of fsck on the thing, to clean up any filesystem glitches.
Is there any such a tool (as fsck for FAT32) available for freeBSD? If so,
where would I find
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:23 AM, Ronald F. Guilmette
r...@tristatelogic.comwrote:
Is there any such a tool (as fsck for FAT32) available for freeBSD? If so,
where would I find it?
/sbin/fsck_msdosfs
--
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions
Is there any such a tool (as fsck for FAT32) available for freeBSD? If so,
where would I find it?
fsck_msdosfs
but, in spite of some fanatics here my get worried, i do recommend use
windoze scandisk.
When recovering data from FAT32 i've proven myself what is actually a
better tool
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 10:56:22 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar articulated:
Is there any such a tool (as fsck for FAT32) available for
freeBSD? If so, where would I find it?
fsck_msdosfs
but, in spite of some fanatics here my get worried, i do recommend
use Window's Scandisk.
If you
On 15/07/2012 09:56, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
but, in spite of some fanatics here my get worried, i do recommend use
windoze scandisk.
I'd forgotten about scandisk - for modern Windows (XP and newer) you'll
want to use chkdsk ( e.g. 'chkdsk /F C:' ).
--
Bruce Cran
Is there any such a tool (as fsck for FAT32) available for freeBSD? If so,
where would I find it?
There's fsck_msdosfs, part of the base system. Regular fsck should
call it automatically if you run it on a FAT filesystem.
R's,
John
___
freebsd
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Bruce Cran wrote:
On 15/07/2012 09:56, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
but, in spite of some fanatics here my get worried, i do recommend use
windoze scandisk.
I'd forgotten about scandisk - for modern Windows (XP and newer) you'll want
to use chkdsk ( e.g. 'chkdsk /F C:' ).
If you absolutely, positively have to recover the drive, I would
recommend SpinRite 6 http://www.grc.com/intro.htm. Its not free;
again i would recommend standard windows scandisk. such tools as the
other utilities are usually not better.
make sure you have full disk backup anyway
On 15/07/2012 19:43, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
both do the same
'scandisk' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
--
Bruce Cran
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
In message CA+tpaK0H=L8pcSkOxxAekfy2rQV49-sWof0FDPsutb8=04b...@mail.gmail.com
, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:23 AM, Ronald F. Guilmette
r...@tristatelogic.comwrote:
Is there any such a tool (as fsck for FAT32) available for freeBSD? If so,
where
In message 5002b996.2000...@cran.org.uk,
Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote:
On 15/07/2012 09:56, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
but, in spite of some fanatics here my get worried, i do recommend use
windoze scandisk.
I'd forgotten about scandisk - for modern Windows (XP and newer) you'll
want to
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 20:43:57 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar articulated:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Bruce Cran wrote:
On 15/07/2012 09:56, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
but, in spite of some fanatics here my get worried, i do recommend
use windoze scandisk.
I'd forgotten about scandisk - for modern
such a tool (as fsck for FAT32) available for freeBSD? If so,
where would I find it?
/sbin/fsck_msdosfs
Thank you. That sure sounds like it ought to do the trick.
It will do its job: Check the file system's integrity.
From that point, you will either have the answer that everything
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:48:23 +0200
Polytropon articulated:
For example, make an 1:1 copy using dd (or ddrescue or dd_rescue)
of the disk. Work with a copy of that copy. Do not alter the disk.
Then use tools that do the job of recovery (see my list postings
about that topic, they contain a
totally in error. SpinRite will attempt to read a damage sector up to
2000 times and through different algorithms determine what is most
man dd
conv=sync,noerror
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Wojciech Puchar
woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote:
totally in error. SpinRite will attempt to read a damage sector up to
2000 times and through different algorithms determine what is most
man dd
Even better,
recoverdisk /dev/da0 /dev/da1
--
Adam
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 23:29:39 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar wrote:
totally in error. SpinRite will attempt to read a damage sector up to
2000 times and through different algorithms determine what is most
man dd
conv=sync,noerror
Even though it doesn't use different algorithms, programs
1 - 100 of 675 matches
Mail list logo
