NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #18/NN_1992_18.iso/spool/comp/unix/bsd/4231

Internet Message Format | 1992-08-16 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!ferkel.ucsb.edu!taco!gatech!swrinde!mips!mips!munnari.oz.au!asgard!mjj
From: [e-mail] (Murray Jensen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: 2nd drive file ... (Actually wd ESDI problems)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 16 Aug 92 16:46:50 GMT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: CSIRO Division of Manufacturing Technology, Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 23

From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Bernard Steiner):
> Well, I don't have DOS. However, I noticed that dd'ing off 386bsd pertitions
> will not find all bad blocks, whereas dd'ing off the 'd' 'partition' does.

I used the 'c' partition because I have a DOS5 partition and a 386BSD partition
(MS-DOS partitions not BSD partitions), and if I used the 'd' partition I would
be told about bad sectors in the DOS partition, which bad144 can't do anything
about. The 'c' partition covers the 386BSD area only, whereas the 'd' partition
covers the whole disk. 'c' and 'd' are the same if you don't use DOS partitions.

> BTW did your kernel actually print out the bad sectors or are you using a
> modified kernel ? If it's the standard thing it does, would you mind
> telling us about any magic flags you gave disklabel.

No. I couldn't make the kernel print the errors - that's why you use dd. dd
will tell you how many blocks it read before the error occurred, from this
information and the (BSD) partition table you can work out the sector number
to give to bad144.
                                Murray...
--
Murray Jensen, CSIRO Div of Manufacturing Tech,     Phone: [phone]
Locked Bag No. 9, Preston, Vic, 3072, Australia.      Fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]               ACSnet: [e-mail]