Print

Print


Sai Emrys skrev:
 > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Benct Philip Jonsson 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 >> 1) Copy original to backup and 2) Copy backup to original.
 >
 > It's just talking about the *boot sector*, AFAICT.
 >
 > Which means that you could just copy both versions of it with 
dd (if
 > you know the exact size and offset information), pick one 
arbitrarily,
 > run some consistency test to see if it's working well enough, 
and then
 > overwrite it with the copied version if it doesn't. (If they're
 > different sizes though, that'll complicate things...)
 >
 > Boot sectors are tiny; we're talking less than a few megs, max. You
 > could put it on a flash drive.
 >
 > However, doing this is not something I'd recommend to anyone 
less than
 > a flat out expert, or someone who has one available. If you 
fuck up,
 > your drive will need power tools to recover.
 >
 > Speaking of which... I've had very good results using R-Studio 
in the
 > past. And a 1.5 TB drive is only $110 off NewEgg.
 >
 > Given that you've given no reason for why your boot sector got 
hosed,
 > I would assume that the drive has A Serious Problem™ until proven
 > innocent, and therefore treat it as dead except when copying 
data off
 > of it to its new home.
 >
 > Check the manufacturer website to see if you can get an RMA or 
advance
 > RMA on it.
 >
 > - Sai
 >

All's well: I found this, whichd clarified things.

<https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub-installer/+bug/47382/comments/6>

Considering the forum and that the guy wasn't contradicted
I decided it reasonably  safe to follow the advice.

Eric Christopherson skrev:
> On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:03 AM, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got this message about problems with the boot
>> sectors on my FAT32 disks at startup of Ubuntu.  I
>> Googled around a bit to find a solution and seem
>> to have find half a one.
> 
> Do you have Windows? If so, maybe you should use the Windows disk 
> checker. (Take that with a grain of salt, though; I'm just offering the 
> suggestion in case you didn't think of it. I have no idea if the drive 
> is hosed enough that running the disk checker will damage it more.)

Oh yes, disk checker 'repairs' by slashing everything
remotely suspect.  Moreover it can't handle modern big
volumes very well.

/BP