Rachid Ayad wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Billy Crook wrote:
> 
>> This goes without saying, but you may want to compare your backups to
>> what you have on disk, and restore files where necessary if the data
>> is at all important.  If it's completely disposable, you might
>> consider a script to umount, reformat, and remount the volume every so
>> often
> 
>  As I said before, fsck fixed the bad sectors but I do not know if the 
> content of the memory is well restored. I am saying this because at the 
> end of fsck the system told me that the content of the bad sectors are 
> saved in /scratch/lost+found/ with files labeled with the sector number 
> like: /scratch/lost+found/#5914818 , so are these files are really a 
> backup of the corrupted memory? are there really good to restore? and 
> how we can restore them from /scratch/lost+found .

fsck does _not_ fix bad sectors. It can fix up (with some 
interpretation) errors in filesystem structures.

lost+found contains fragments of files that could not be repaired. It's 
up to you to decide what to do with them, and whether it's better to use 
a proper backup.





-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
[log in to unmask]  [log in to unmask]
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)