Ugh, the karmic code is quite a bit different, so I basically needed to implement the same logic for a rather different code base. It's working now, though (see attached debdiff). The SRU test case (see description) is working now, and I also run the old and new version against all the blob examples which are in the source code:
for i in blob-examples/*; do echo "-- $i"; ./skdump --load=$i; done The diff between the old and new version is --- atasmart-test.old 2010-04-23 15:20:42.636609956 +0200 +++ atasmart-test.new 2010-04-23 16:06:49.966609923 +0200 @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ Average Powered On Per Power Cycle: 1.1 h Temperature: No such file or directory Attribute Parsing Verification: Good -Overall Status: BAD_SECTOR_MANY +Overall Status: BAD_SECTOR ID# Name Value Worst Thres Pretty Raw Type Updates Good Good/Past 1 raw-read-error-rate 253 252 0 343062 0x163c05000000 old-age online n/a n/a 3 spin-up-time 196 191 63 62 ms 0x3e000000fa37 prefail online yes yes @@ -620,7 +620,7 @@ Average Powered On Per Power Cycle: 11.2 days Temperature: 40.0 C Attribute Parsing Verification: Good -Overall Status: BAD_SECTOR_MANY +Overall Status: BAD_SECTOR ID# Name Value Worst Thres Pretty Raw Type Updates Good Good/Past 1 raw-read-error-rate 200 200 51 18 0x120000000000 prefail online yes yes 3 spin-up-time 208 164 21 4.6 s 0xd61100000000 prefail online yes yes The first one is against blob-examples/Maxtor_96147H8--BAC51KJ0: 5 reallocated-sector-count 226 226 63 69 sectors 0x450000000000 prefail online yes yes and the second one against blob-examples/WDC_WD5000AAKS--00TMA0-12.01C01 5 reallocated-sector-count 192 192 140 63 sectors 0x3f0000000000 prefail online yes yes so under the premise of changing the evaluation to use the normalized numbers those are correct and expected changes. (I. e. in those two cases you would have gotten a "many bad blocks" warning before). ** Patch added: "karmic debdiff" http://launchpadlibrarian.net/45106159/karmic.debdiff -- palimpsest bad sectors false positive https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/438136 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
