All new docs in the last five days are gone!
Rashkae
ubuntu at tigershaunt.com
Fri Feb 20 00:44:51 UTC 2009
NoOp wrote:
> On 02/18/2009 08:00 PM, Rashkae wrote:
>
>> If the Hard drive hasn't already declared itself dead, then you should
>> use badblocks to scan the surface.
>
> Hmmm... I've never tried badblocks, so I checked 'man badblocks':
>
> Important note: If the output of badblocks is going to be fed to the
> e2fsck or mke2fs programs, it is important that the block size is prop‐
> erly specified, since the block numbers which are generated are very
> dependent on the block size in use by the filesystem. For this reason,
> it is strongly recommended that users not run badblocks directly, but
> rather use the -c option of the e2fsck and mke2fs programs.
>
> seems to have more 'Warnings':
> WARNING
> Never use the -w option on a device containing an existing file system.
> This option erases data! If you want to do write-mode testing on an
> existing file system, use the -n option instead. It is slower, but it
> will preserve your data.
>
> Is there a 'Dummys' guide to using badblocks so as to not hose a drive
> in the process?
>
>
man badblocks was it :)
The -w, -f and -X -n options are the only way to use badblocks that will
hose a filesystem, so don't.
The astute reader will note that I suggested the OP do a non-destructive
read-write test, which is the -n option that I just said don't use :)
-n tries not to hose your filesystem, but since it does involve writing
directly to the disk, there is some risk. If the hard drive really is
bad, anything can happen.. I also wouldn't want a hard drive I was
treating this way to be interrupted by something as mundane as a power
failure. Backups are a must before attempting this kind of low level
operation.
More information about the ubuntu-users
mailing list