"Forever" fsck?
in [Linux Hardware]
|
Prev: SB Audigy SE and linux problems
Next: ata1 timeout
From: joseph2k on 20 Sep 2006 00:16 Andrew Gideon wrote: > On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 07:38:23 +0000, joseph2k wrote: > > >> I personally am in favor of reformatting the partition to say NTFS then >> back to EXT3. After running smartmontools of course. > > I understand the benefit (and cost) of a reformat. But why "through" NTFS > (or anything else other than ext3)? > > - Andrew Precisely, something very different than ext3. Then when you reformat back the reformatting is 100% real; no shortcuts. I have had this make all the difference. -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller
From: John Thompson on 21 Sep 2006 21:05 On 2006-09-20, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Andrew Gideon wrote: > >> On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 07:38:23 +0000, joseph2k wrote: >> >>> I personally am in favor of reformatting the partition to say NTFS then >>> back to EXT3. After running smartmontools of course. >> >> I understand the benefit (and cost) of a reformat. But why "through" NTFS >> (or anything else other than ext3)? > Precisely, something very different than ext3. Then when you reformat back > the reformatting is 100% real; no shortcuts. I have had this make all the > difference. Why not just "vfat" then? Less filesystem cruft to create if you're just going to blow it away again right away. -- -John (john(a)os2.dhs.org)
From: joseph2k on 22 Sep 2006 00:00 John Thompson wrote: > On 2006-09-20, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Andrew Gideon wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 07:38:23 +0000, joseph2k wrote: >>> >>>> I personally am in favor of reformatting the partition to say NTFS then >>>> back to EXT3. After running smartmontools of course. >>> >>> I understand the benefit (and cost) of a reformat. But why "through" >>> NTFS (or anything else other than ext3)? > >> Precisely, something very different than ext3. Then when you reformat >> back >> the reformatting is 100% real; no shortcuts. I have had this make all >> the difference. > > Why not just "vfat" then? Less filesystem cruft to create if you're just > going to blow it away again right away. > I have found that the characteristic distribution of vfat cruft does not always wipe the areas needed, whereas ntfs just seems to work better for this task. YMMV -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller
From: Grant on 22 Sep 2006 00:46 On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 04:00:29 GMT, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >John Thompson wrote: > >> On 2006-09-20, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> Andrew Gideon wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 07:38:23 +0000, joseph2k wrote: >>>> >>>>> I personally am in favor of reformatting the partition to say NTFS then >>>>> back to EXT3. After running smartmontools of course. >>>> >>>> I understand the benefit (and cost) of a reformat. But why "through" >>>> NTFS (or anything else other than ext3)? >> >>> Precisely, something very different than ext3. Then when you reformat >>> back >>> the reformatting is 100% real; no shortcuts. I have had this make all >>> the difference. >> >> Why not just "vfat" then? Less filesystem cruft to create if you're just >> going to blow it away again right away. >> > >I have found that the characteristic distribution of vfat cruft does not >always wipe the areas needed, whereas ntfs just seems to work better for >this task. YMMV Try: 'dd if=/dev/zero bs=4k of=/dev/hdX' prior to any formatting, not only clears the partition, it gives the IDE smarts a chance to remap iffy sectors. This format as something else and back to whatever is a stupid idea, IMHO. Grant. -- http://bugsplatter.mine.nu/
From: joseph2k on 28 Sep 2006 22:36
Grant wrote: > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 04:00:29 GMT, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> > wrote: > >>John Thompson wrote: >> >>> On 2006-09-20, joseph2k <quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Andrew Gideon wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 07:38:23 +0000, joseph2k wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I personally am in favor of reformatting the partition to say NTFS >>>>>> then >>>>>> back to EXT3. After running smartmontools of course. >>>>> >>>>> I understand the benefit (and cost) of a reformat. But why "through" >>>>> NTFS (or anything else other than ext3)? >>> >>>> Precisely, something very different than ext3. Then when you reformat >>>> back >>>> the reformatting is 100% real; no shortcuts. I have had this make all >>>> the difference. >>> >>> Why not just "vfat" then? Less filesystem cruft to create if you're just >>> going to blow it away again right away. >>> >> >>I have found that the characteristic distribution of vfat cruft does not >>always wipe the areas needed, whereas ntfs just seems to work better for >>this task. YMMV > > Try: 'dd if=/dev/zero bs=4k of=/dev/hdX' prior to any formatting, not only > clears the partition, it gives the IDE smarts a chance to remap iffy > sectors. > > This format as something else and back to whatever is a stupid idea, IMHO. > > Grant. If i had the smarts to write a program to smash any partition or disk with ramdom data a one or more times i would use that. Followed by zero to the whole partition to eliminate cruft where boot loaders usually occupy. Perhaps there is something like /dev/random to generate the total garbage desired. Do you know? -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller |