...making Linux just a little more fun!
M.Rashid Shahzad [donsmooker at yahoo.com]
Please Reply the bad sector removing method and bad sector removing the software name or this software use for the procedure.All method reply the easy words. Please help this working.Thanks.Bye
Kapil Hari Paranjape [kapil at imsc.res.in]
Hello,
On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, M.Rashid Shahzad wrote:
> Please Reply the bad sector removing method and bad sector removing > the software name or this software use for the procedure.All method > reply the easy words. Please help this working.Thanks.Bye
I think the program "badblocks" will check a disk for bad blocks (by running read and *more dangerously* write tests). This program produces the list of bad blocks in a manner which can be used by file system tools to mark blocks as unusable.
If you are using the disk, then it is best to run this in read-only mode. For example, for an ext2/3 file system on /dev/sda5 you would use
e2fsck -c /dev/sda5
This command will call "badblocks" in read-only mode to perform the disk scan. This operation can take a long time for large disks. Note that any file data that has already been written to these blocks before performing the check might not be recoverable.
If you are not using the disk and are planning to check for badblocks before using it then it is best to again use file system tools to check the bad blocks and create the file system in one command. For example, to create an ext2/3 file system on /dev/sda5 you would use mke2fs -c -c /dev/sda5 Specifying -c twice will make the badblocks program check for write access as well and this will be take twice the time of the read-only check (typically).
There is no way to "remove" bad sectors entirely --- one can only mark them as bad so that the operating system will ignore these sectors while using the disk.
Regards,
Kapil. --
M.Rashid Shahzad [donsmooker at yahoo.com]
--- On Fri, 9/19/08, M.Rashid Shahzad <[email protected]> wrote:
From: M.Rashid Shahzad <[email protected]> Subject: bad sector removing To: [email protected] Date: Friday, September 19, 2008, 3:25 AM
Please Reply the bad sector removing method and bad sector removing the software name or this software use for the procedure.All method reply the easy words. Please help this working.Thanks.Bye
Ben Okopnik [ben at linuxgazette.net]
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 08:41:35PM -0700, M.Rashid Shahzad wrote:
> > Please Reply the bad sector removing method and bad sector removing the > software name or this software use for the procedure.All method reply > the easy words. Please help this working.Thanks.Bye
How's this for easy:
STOP. SPAMMING. US.
Asking a question in a help forum is reasonable. Sending the same message again and again while ignoring the replies to your original question is damn rude.
Asking Questions of The Answer Gang: http://linuxgazette.net/faq/ask-the-gang.html
How to Ask Smart Questions: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Netiquette Guidelines RFC: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html
-- * Ben Okopnik * Editor-in-Chief, Linux Gazette * http://LinuxGazette.NET *
Rick Moen [rick at linuxmafia.com]
Quoting Ben Okopnik ([email protected]):
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 08:41:35PM -0700, M.Rashid Shahzad wrote:
> > Please Reply the bad sector removing method and bad sector removing the > > software name or this software use for the procedure.All method reply > > the easy words. Please help this working.Thanks.Bye > > How's this for easy: > > STOP. SPAMMING. US.
Rashid, just as incentive: Ben's the nice guy. I'm the nasty mean sysadmin with the trigger finger on the system-wide conffiles who can and will terminate your ability to send any mail to _Linux Gazette's_ TAG mailing address permanently if you don't follow Ben's good advice immediately. So, you're going to want to do that.
(I've been away for two weeks, and so was unaware of your having abused the mailing list until now.)
Kapil Hari Paranjape [kapil at imsc.res.in]
Hello,
On Sun, 21 Sep 2008, Ben Okopnik wrote:
> Sending the same message again and again while ignoring the replies > to your original question is damn rude.
Oops, this may have partly been my fault! My reply did not have a copy to querent.
Sending him a separate copy now with a request to reply to the list.
Regards,
Kapil. --