Search Results

Search found 870 results on 35 pages for 'sector'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 15/35 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • Open Source Saves the Day (and Lots of Dosh)

    <b>Open Enterprise:</b> "It seems every day we hear about hideous cost overruns on public sector projects in the UK. What makes it even more frustrating is that open source, a real no-brainer for many applications, is rarely given the chance to prove itself here."

    Read the article

  • Can Your Web Design Company Choose the Right SEO Keywords?

    When you are trying to achieve good results in the search engines, it sounds obvious, but you want your website to appear high in the results for the most popular searches, and you need to be certain that your web design company can find out what these are. Finding out what the most popular searches are in your sector can throw up a few surprises!

    Read the article

  • Internet Marketing With SEO - For Highly Effective Upshots

    With the growing needs of people, internet marketing has been picked up as the latest trend in marketing sector. With numerous factors considered for designing marketing strategies on web, SEO is one of the best. Most of the huge business ventures, these days are looking for new methods so that their website can get optimized and ranked higher on the search engines.

    Read the article

  • External 1TB WD USB 3.0 HDD is not detecting. Working perfectly find in Windows

    - by Yathi
    My 1TB USB 3.0 was working fine earlier in Ubuntu as well as Windows. But lately it is not at all being detected in Ubuntu. It still works fine in Windows. I did update my Ubuntu to 12.10 but I am not sure if that caused the issue. When I connect my HDD and run dmesg | tail: [ 47.804676] usb 4-3: >Device not responding to set address. [ 48.008575] usb 4-3: >Device not responding to set address. [ 48.212421] usb 4-3: >device not accepting address 9, error -71 [ 48.324451] usb 4-3: >Device not responding to set address. [ 48.528340] usb 4-3: >Device not responding to set address. [ 48.732165] usb 4-3: >device not accepting address 10, error -71 [ 48.844138] usb 4-3: >Device not responding to set address. [ 49.048179] usb 4-3: >Device not responding to set address. [ 49.251881] usb 4-3: >device not accepting address 11, error -71 [ 49.251907] hub 4-0:1.0: >unable to enumerate USB device on port 3 The output of sudo fdisk -l is : Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00030cde Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 2048 1332981759 666489856 83 Linux /dev/sda2 1332981760 1953523711 310270976 5 Extended /dev/sda5 1332983808 1349365759 8190976 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda6 1349367808 1953523711 302077952 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT Disk /dev/sdb: 120.0 GB, 120034123776 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 14593 cylinders, total 234441648 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000a2519 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 2048 103368703 51683328 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sdb2 103368704 154568703 25600000 83 Linux /dev/sdb3 154568704 234440703 39936000 7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT /dev/sda and /dev/sdb are my 2 internal HDDs. But the external one which should be /dev/sdc is not even being shown though it is connected and the LED on the HDD is glowing. Someone had suggested adding blacklist uas to /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist.conf. Tried that as well. But still not working. Can someone help me out.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 10.04 preseed unattended install results in faulty partition table

    - by joschi
    I'm currently trying to set up an unattended installation of Ubuntu 10.04 (Lucid Lynx) through preseeding. But whenever I try to create a custom partition scheme, the Debian installer (which Ubuntu is using) produces a faulty partition table. I've taken the partition scheme described in the example preseed file: d-i partman-auto/expert_recipe string \ boot-root :: \ 40 50 100 ext3 \ $primary{ } $bootable{ } \ method{ format } format{ } \ use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ ext3 } \ mountpoint{ /boot } \ . \ 500 10000 1000000000 ext3 \ method{ format } format{ } \ use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ ext3 } \ mountpoint{ / } \ . \ 64 512 300% linux-swap \ method{ swap } format{ } \ . Unfortunately it also produces an incorrect partition table on the disk. The installation process itself is working and the installed system eventually boots and is working, as far as I can tell. But fdisk and cfdisk are still complaining: # fdisk -l /dev/sda Disk /dev/sda: 17.2 GB, 17179869184 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 2088 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000a1cdd Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 5 37888 83 Linux Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda2 5 2089 16736257 5 Extended /dev/sda5 5 2013 16121856 83 Linux /dev/sda6 2013 2089 613376 82 Linux swap / Solaris cfdisk even refuses to start at all: # cfdisk /dev/sda FATAL ERROR: Bad primary partition 1: Partition ends in the final partial cylinder parted on the other hand does not complain about the cylinder boundary of /dev/sda1: # parted /dev/sda p Model: VMware Virtual disk (scsi) Disk /dev/sda: 17.2GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: msdos Number Start End Size Type File system Flags 1 1049kB 39.8MB 38.8MB primary ext4 boot 2 40.9MB 17.2GB 17.1GB extended 5 40.9MB 16.5GB 16.5GB logical ext4 6 16.6GB 17.2GB 628MB logical linux-swap(v1) Since the installed system is working, it shouldn't be a big problem but I'm afraid that this will mean trouble in the future.

    Read the article

  • Why does my dd backup of MacBook OS X fail to boot upon restore?

    - by James
    I created a backup of a MacBook hard drive (WD2500BEVS-88US) by hooking it up as a secondary drive on my linux system (Ubuntu 10.10). I used the following command: sudo dd if=/dev/sdc of=/home/backup.img bs=2M This appears to have completed with no errors. I noticed that the file is only 68 GB in size even though the drive is 250 GB in capacity. I restored the image to a spare drive (WD2500BEVS) with the following command: sudo dd if=/home/backup.img of=/dev/sdb bs=2M When I boot the spare drive in the Mac, it appears to start up for a few seconds and then shuts down. (It does not appear to load into the OS at all). When I open up the drive that won't boot in GParted, it looks like this: When looking at the information for the middle partition with the little red exclamation mark, it shows this: The original hard drive that boots ok shows up like this: Further info on both drives: sudo fdisk -l Disk /dev/sdb: 250.1 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 1 30402 244198580 ee GPT WARNING: GPT (GUID Partition Table) detected on '/dev/sdc'! The util fdisk doesn't support GPT. Use GNU Parted. Disk /dev/sdc: 250.1 GB, 250059350016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdc1 1 30402 244198580 ee GPT So why is my backup or restore failing? Why is dd not creating a byte for byte duplicate?

    Read the article

  • Variable size encrypted container

    - by Cray
    Is there an application similar to TrueCrypt, but the one that can make variable size containers opposed to fixed-size or only-growing-to-certain-amount containers which can be made by TrueCrypt? I want this container to be able to be mounted to a drive/folder, and the size of the outer container not be much different from the total size of all the files that I put into the mounted folder, while still providing strong encryption. If to put it in other words, I want a program like truecrypt, which not only automatically grows the container if I put in new files, but also decreases it's size if some files are deleted. I know there are some issues of course, and it would not work 100% as truecrypt, because it basically works on the sector level of the disk, giving all the filesystem-control to the OS, and so when I remove a file, it might as well be left there, or there might be some fragmentation issues that would stop just truncating the volume from working, but perhaps a program can be built in some other way? Instead of providing sector-level interface, it would provide filesystem-level interface? A filesystem inside a file which would support shrinking when files are deleted?

    Read the article

  • How to recover deleted NTFS partitions?

    - by Frank
    Last night I made a terrible mistake. I was reinstalling Windows and I accidentally deleted all the partitions on all my drives. I realized my mistake before I had created any partitions, so nothing has been written to any of the disks. I'm currently at my wits' end about what I'll do if I don't manage to recover the data. I have two 1TB drives and a 2TB. One of the 1TB was the drive I was supposed to be reformatting so nothing to be recovered there. I am currently in a Linux livecd. In this article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/245725 Microsoft advises to recreate the exact same partition but choose not to format it, and then recover the backup boot sector from the end of the ntfs volume. But none of the drives I want to recover are bootable drives. So does that mean I do not need to rewrite the boot sector? As in if I simply recreate a partition of the same size it will see all my data? Or would I be better off using the TestDisk utility? http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk Please help, I'm desperate!!

    Read the article

  • Give back full control to a user on a disk from another computer

    - by Foghorn
    I have my friend's hard drive mounted externally. After messing with the permissions with TAKEOWN so I could fix some viruses, I have full control over their drive. The problem is, now it's stuck in a "autochk not found" reboot sequence. I think the problem is that the boot sector is invisible to the drive now. So my question is, How can I use icacls to give back the full ownership, when the user I am giving it to is not on my machine? I ran the TAKEOWN command from my windows 7 laptop, their machine is a windows xp Professional with three partitions, I only altered the one that has the boot sector. Here is the permissions that icacls shows: (Where my computer is %System% my username is ME, and the drive is E:\ C:\Users\ME icacls E:\* E:\$RECYCLE.BIN %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) Mandatory Label\Low Mandatory Level:(OI)(CI)(IO)(NW) E:\ALLDATAW %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\alrt_200.data %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\AUTOEXEC.BAT %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\AZ Commercial %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\boot.ini %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\Config.Msi %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\CONFIG.SYS %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\Documents and Settings %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\IO.SYS %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\Mitchell1 %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\MSDOS.SYS %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\MSOCache %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\NTDClient.log %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\NTDETECT.COM %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\ntldr %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\pagefile.sys %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\Program Files %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\RECYCLER %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\RHDSetup.log %System%\ME:(OI)(CI)(F) E:\System Volume Information %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) E:\WINDOWS %System%\ME:(I)(OI)(CI)(F) Successfully processed 22 files; Failed processing 0 files C:\Users\ME

    Read the article

  • Issue booting Linux Mint from Live CD?

    - by Vee
    I had Windows 8 and Linux Mint 15 dual booted on my laptop. When I first installed Linux, I wasn't able to load into because the grub would not show. To fix this, I used boot-repair from a Live CD. This time, I updated to Windows 8.1 and it showed a watermark telling me my secure boot wasn't configured properly. I then went and enabled secure boot (BIOS) and I believe it was after that that the Grub would not show once again. I tried to boot from a Linux CD again but when I try, it gives me the following errors: error: failure reading sector 0x0 from 'hd1' error: you need to load the kernel first. Press any key to continue... Before, it was giving me an error with sector 0x6d200 or something instead of 0x0. I am completely unsure of what to do. I do not know what other details to give except that this my have happened after I enabled secure boot, and I actually clicked reset to default setting so I am unsure if any other settings were changed in the BIOS menu.

    Read the article

  • Can't mount FAT32 drive under Ubuntu Linux

    - by Josh
    I have a 320GB USB drive with a single large FAT32 partition. The volume mounts perfectly fine on my Mac OS X 10.5.8 machine and Disk Utility on the mac reports no issues with the volume. I can read/write all data on the drive. However when I connect the drive to my Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic system, the partition does not mount. dmesg|tail says: [ 2752.334822] scsi3 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices [ 2752.335040] usb-storage: device found at 3 [ 2752.335044] usb-storage: waiting for device to settle before scanning [ 2757.330301] usb-storage: device scan complete [ 2757.331005] scsi 3:0:0:0: Direct-Access WD 3200AAK External 1.65 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0 [ 2757.331772] sd 3:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg2 type 0 [ 2757.355647] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] 625142448 512-byte logical blocks: (320 GB/298 GiB) [ 2757.360737] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Write Protect is off [ 2757.360749] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Mode Sense: 00 00 00 00 [ 2757.360755] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2757.367618] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2757.367631] sdb: sdb1 [ 2762.797622] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Assuming drive cache: write through [ 2762.797636] sd 3:0:0:0: [sdb] Attached SCSI disk [ 2822.866228] FAT: bogus number of reserved sectors [ 2822.866237] VFS: Can't find a valid FAT filesystem on dev sdb1. When I run fsck.vfat -a /dev/sdb1 I get: root@cartman:~# fsck.vfat -a /dev/sdb1 dosfsck 3.0.3, 18 May 2009, FAT32, LFN Logical sector size is zero. Googling "vfat Logical sector size is zero" produced no consensus as to the solution. I would prefer not to have to completely reformat the disk if possible because it contains about 280GB of data I would rather not have to find a temporary home for. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Recovering a damaged microSDHC

    - by djechelon
    I just bought from eBay a Kingston 32GB microSDHC that was advertised as defective. The seller said that there could be formatting problems or with transfer of large files. Unfortunately, when I got it, it was a total mess. My Nikon camera doesn't read it at all (OK, maybe it doesn't support 32GB) My Linux laptop doesn't mount it: can't read superblock The same laptop refuses to mkfs.msdos because it failed whilst writing reserved sector The same laptop, under Windows, doesn't read nor format the card HTC HD2 mounts the MMC, allows me to write via USB, but is unable to open the just written files OK, folks, now you would say I would have to go through Paypal complaint... that's not that easy. I consciously bought a half-price card that was known to show some defects, and Paypal complaints take time. Obviously, I can't accept somebody sold me a completely use-less computer decoration. So I'll keep it as last option. My question is Do you know a way, under either Linux or Windows, to thoroughly scan, test and possibly repair memory cards, even if I have to lose some percentage of space because of bad sectors? If I can keep at least half of the card intact it would certainly be fine. I used to do broken sector marking with hard disks in the past. I almost forgot: MONSTR:/home/djechelon # fsck /dev/mmcblk0p1 fsck from util-linux-ng 2.17.2 dosfsck 3.0.9, 31 Jan 2010, FAT32, LFN Read 512 bytes at 0:Input/output error

    Read the article

  • a disk read error occurred

    - by kellogs
    Hi, ¨a disk read error occurred¨ appears on screen after choosing to boot into Windows XP from GRUB. [root@localhost linux]# fdisk -lu Disk /dev/sda: 160.0 GB, 160041885696 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 19457 cylinders, total 312581808 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x48424841 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 63 204214271 102107104+ 7 HPFS/NTFS Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda2 204214272 255606783 25696256 af HFS / HFS+ Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda3 255606784 276488191 10440704 c W95 FAT32 (LBA) Partition 3 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda4 276490179 312576704 18043263 5 Extended /dev/sda5 * 276490240 286709759 5109760 83 Linux /dev/sda6 286712118 310488254 11888068+ b W95 FAT32 /dev/sda7 310488318 312576704 1044193+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris sda is a 160GB hard disk with quite a few partitions and 3 OSes installed. I am able to boot into Linux and Mac OS fine, but not into Windows anymore. The Windows system is located on /dev/sda1. I can not recall how exactly have I used testdisk but it once said that ¨The harddisk /dev/sda (160GB / 149 GB) seems too small! (< 172GB / 157GB)¨ or something simillar. So far I have tried to ¨fixboot¨ and ¨chkdsk¨ from a recovery console on the affected windows partition (/dev/sda1), the plug off power cord for 15 seconds trick, reinstalling GRUB, repairing the MFT and boot sector of the affected partition via testdisk, what next please ? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • How do I create an MBR on a USB stick using DD command line tool

    - by Lana Miller
    Okay I'm trying to create a BOOTABLE Windows7 image on a USB key from a Mac running Lion. My image is .iso format. I tried: sudo dd if=/Users/myusername/Win7.iso of=/dev/disk1 bs=1m And this succeeded in writing the files, except in DISK UTILITY on the mac, it shows the partition type as GUID Partition Table and not 'Master Boor Record'. Booting the key on my Vista computer yields the error "No boot sector on USB Device' From what I can tell, bs=1m in the DD command should have left 1 Megabyte for the boot sector, but for some reason this area of the USB Key is not set up correctly so that it will boot How can I fix this, or correctly use dd to write a bootable cd image such that it is now a bootable usb drive? Note: in the instructions I read about, they recommended renaming my Win7.iso to Win7.dmg before using DD, which made absolutely no sense to me, so I didn't do it. I could try with that step now, but it takes 1.99 hours to write the image to the USB drive so there is a huge penalty to trial and error here. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Cannot load from raid with grub

    - by Andrew Answer
    I have a RAID1 array on my Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and my /sda HDD has been replaced several days ago. I use this commands to replace: # go to superuser sudo bash # see RAID state mdadm -Q -D /dev/md0 # State should be "clean, degraded" # remove broken disk from RAID mdadm /dev/md0 --fail /dev/sda1 mdadm /dev/md0 --remove /dev/sda1 # see partitions fdisk -l # shutdown computer shutdown now # physically replace old disk by new # start system again # see partitions fdisk -l # copy partitions from sdb to sda sfdisk -d /dev/sdb | sfdisk /dev/sda # recreate id for sda sfdisk --change-id /dev/sda 1 fd # add sda1 to RAID mdadm /dev/md0 --add /dev/sda1 # see RAID state mdadm -Q -D /dev/md0 # State should be "clean, degraded, recovering" # to see status you can use cat /proc/mdstat After bebuilding completion "fdisk -l" says what I have not valid partition table /dev/md0. So 1) "update-grub" find only /sda and /sdb Linux, not /md0 2) "dpkg-reconfigure grub-pc" says "GRUB failed to install the following devices /dev/md0" I cannot load my system except from /sdb1 and /sda1, but in DEGRADED mode... This is my partial fdisk -l output: Disk /dev/sdb: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders, total 976773168 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x000667ca Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 63 940910984 470455461 fd Linux raid autodetect /dev/sdb2 940910985 976768064 17928540 5 Extended /dev/sdb5 940911048 976768064 17928508+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris Disk /dev/md0: 481.7 GB, 481746288640 bytes 2 heads, 4 sectors/track, 117613840 cylinders, total 940910720 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/md0 doesn't contain a valid partition table Anybody can resolve this issue? I have big headache with this.

    Read the article

  • Why does this loopback device creation malfunction?

    - by user50118
    The stackoverflow people thought this was more appropriate here, I put it there as it is part of a program but I can see their POV, so here it is: At the bottom of the code you can see it failing. In fact, I'll put it here at the start too because it is the problem I need to solve: [350591.924819] EXT4-fs (loop0): bad geometry: block count 9750806 exceeds size of device (9750168 blocks) I don't understand why the device is supposedly too small. I made this partition two days ago with normal fdisk, it was created and formatted with ext4 supplying no options other than the partition (/dev/sdb2) to format. The only explaination I can think of is that ext4 has the size of the partition wrong somehow but that seems very unlikely. What is wrong with my math? The offset is correct, you can see that with the file command, and the size should be correct too because End - Start comes to the same number of sectors minus 1, just like it should (A disk starting on sector 1 and ending on sector 2 would be 2 - 1 = 1 and have two sectors). # sfdisk -luS /dev/sdb Disk /dev/sdb: 9729 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track Units = sectors of 512 bytes, counting from 0 Device Boot Start End #sectors Id System /dev/sdb2 78295040 156296384 78001345 83 Linux # losetup -r -f --show -o $((78295040 * 512)) --sizelimit $((78001345 * 512)) /dev/sdb /dev/loop0 # file -s /dev/loop0 /dev/loop0: Linux rev 1.0 ext4 filesystem data (needs journal recovery) (extents) (large files) (huge files) # mount -o ro -t ext4 /dev/loop0 /mnt mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/loop0, missing codepage or helper program, or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so # dmesg | tail -n 1 [350591.924819] EXT4-fs (loop0): bad geometry: block count 9750806 exceeds size of device (9750168 blocks)

    Read the article

  • Are flash drives and hard drives thought of as "an ocean of bytes"?

    - by Jian Lin
    Why can a USB Flash drive be formatted as NTFS or FAT32? Is the USB Flash Drive and Hard Drive just to be thought of as "an ocean of bytes"? I get very used to hearing formatting a hard drive as FAT32 or NTFS, but we can also format a USB Flash drive as NTFS or FAT32? Is it because a hard drive or Flash drive both can be thought of as "an ocean of bits" or "an ocean of bytes"? I remember RAM as: it takes 16 bit or 32 bit as an address signal (the 16 or 32 copper footing on the circuit board), and give out 8 bit of data (the other 8 copper footing on the circuit board). So can a hard drive be thought of as working that way too? So that's why a Flash drive can be the same too? Just an "ocean of bytes". But is it true that hard drive's hardware make it an ocean of sector or something else, that is, the smaller unit of read / write is not byte but something else? So with this "ocean of bytes", NTFS has the format that says, "if the first byte is __, then it means __ (it is a file or folder, and link to which sector, indicated by byte 2 and 3, etc, etc)"

    Read the article

  • Problems using InfraRecorder to back up ISOs of certain CDs

    - by Voyagerfan5761
    I've gotten into the habit of backing up my CDs as ISO files, just in case the discs should be damanged, lost, or destroyed. Using InfraRecorder, the process is pretty painless. Unfortunately, I have run into at least two discs that don't back up. I get the error message: Can't read source disc. Retrying from sector 252270 Sometimes this will appear repeatedly. One of the discs is my retail copy of Star Trek: Armada II; the other is disc one of DOOM 3. Both discs run flawlessly when I put them in the drive and let Windows AutoPlay them. Armada II appears as two tracks (one data, one audio) in InfraRecorder, and the error happens at the approximate track boundary. DOOM 3's first disc, however, fails much sooner (around sector 990) and appears as one solid data track. Am I simply using the wrong tools for this job? InfraRecorder is a nice free tool that I can run from my flash drive and use for most tasks of this type, but it does seem to have trouble with certain things. Ideally I'd like to hear about any workarounds people have found for this issue, but if I must switch tools I'm open to it (preferably other free tools).

    Read the article

  • Accidentally dd'ed an image to wrong drive / overwrote partition table + NTFS partition start

    - by Kento Locatelli
    I screwed up and set the wrong output for dd when trying to copy a freenas iso, overwriting the wrong external hard drive. Ironically, I was trying to setup a freenas server for data backup... External drive is only used for data storage, system is entirely intact Drive had a single NTFS partition filing the entire device (2TB WD elements) Drive originally had an MBR partition table. Drive now shows as having a GPT, presumably from the freenas image. Drive was mounted at the time, with maybe a couple kB of data written/read after running dd Drive is just a few months old and healthy (regular SMART / fs checks) I have not reboot the OS (crunchbang) /proc/partition still holds the correct information (and has been stored) Have dd's output (records in / out / bytes) testdrive did not find any partitions on quick or deep search running photorec to recover the more important data (a couple recent plaintext files that hadn't been backed up yet). Vast majority of disk content ( 80%) is unnecessary media files. My current plan is to let photorec do it's thing, then recreate the mbr with gparted and use cfdisk to create another NTFS partition using the sector information from /sys/block/.../. Is that a good course of action (that is, a chance of success)? Or anything else I should try first? Possibly relevant information: dd if=FreeNAS-8.0.4-RELEASE-p3-x86.iso of=/dev/sdc: 194568+0 records in 194568+0 records out 99618816 bytes (100 MB) copied grep . /sys/block/sdc/sdc*/{start,size}: /sys/block/sdc/sdc1/start:2048 /sys/block/sdc/sdc1/size:3907022848 cat /proc/partitions: major minor #blocks name ** Snipped ** 8 32 1953512448 sdc 8 33 1953511424 sdc1 current fdisk -l output: WARNING: GPT (GUID Partition Table) detected on '/dev/sdc'! The util fdisk doesn't support GPT. Use GNU Parted. Disk /dev/sdc: 2000.4 GB, 2000396746752 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x00000000 Disk /dev/sdc doesn't contain a valid partition table

    Read the article

  • "A disk read error occurred" after choosing to boot into Windows XP from GRUB

    - by kellogs
    "A disk read error occurred" appears on screen after choosing to boot into Windows XP from GRUB. [root@localhost linux]# fdisk -lu Disk /dev/sda: 160.0 GB, 160041885696 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 19457 cylinders, total 312581808 sectors Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x48424841 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 63 204214271 102107104+ 7 HPFS/NTFS Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda2 204214272 255606783 25696256 af HFS / HFS+ Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda3 255606784 276488191 10440704 c W95 FAT32 (LBA) Partition 3 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/sda4 276490179 312576704 18043263 5 Extended /dev/sda5 * 276490240 286709759 5109760 83 Linux /dev/sda6 286712118 310488254 11888068+ b W95 FAT32 /dev/sda7 310488318 312576704 1044193+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris Here, sda is a 160GB hard disk with quite a few partitions and 3 OSes installed. I am able to boot into Linux and Mac OS fine, but not into Windows anymore. The Windows system is located on /dev/sda1. I cannot recall how exactly have I used testdisk but it once said: Disk /dev/sda - 160 GB / 149 GiB - CHS 19458 255 63 The harddisk (160 GB / 149 GiB) seems too small! (< 169 GB / 157 GiB) Check the harddisk size: HD jumper settings, BIOS detection... So far I have tried to "fixboot" and "chkdsk" from a recovery console on the affected windows partition (/dev/sda1), the plug off power cord for 15 seconds trick, reinstalling GRUB, repairing the MFT and boot sector of the affected partition via testdisk, what next please? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Recommended drive encryption solution

    - by Chris Driver
    Hello, I will soon be purchasing a number of laptops running Windows 7 for our mobile staff. Due to the nature of our business I will need drive encryption. Windows BitLocker seems the obvious choice, but it looks like I need to purchase either Windows 7 Enterprise or Ultimate editions to get it. Can anyone offer suggestions on the best course of action: a) Use BitLocker, bite the bullet and pay to upgrade to Enterprise/Ultimate b) Pay for another 3rd party drive encryption product that is cheaper (suggestions appreciated) c) Use a free drive encryption product such as TrueCrypt Ideally I am also interested in 'real world' experience from people who are using drive encryption software and any pitfalls to look out for. Many thanks in advance... UPDATE Decided to go with TrueCrypt for the following reasons: a) The product has a good track record b) I am not managing a large quantity of laptops so integration with Active Directory, Management consoles etc is not a huge benefit c) Although eks did make a good point about Evil Maid (EM) attacks, our data is not that desirable to consider it a major factor d) The cost (free) is a big plus but not the primary motivator The next problem I face is imaging (Acronis/Ghost/..) encrypted drives will not work unless I perform sector-by-sector imaging. That means an 80Gb encrypted partition creates an 80Gb image file :(

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >