Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!convex!convex!convex!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!network.ucsd.edu!news.cerf.net!crash!warelock From: warelock@crash.cts.com (Tom Zacharoff) Subject: Re: bad144 problem? Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA Date: 22 Aug 93 09:12:23 PDT Message-ID: <1993Aug22.091223.24745@crash> References: <CC3x77.I3s@sugar.NeoSoft.COM> Lines: 14 Peter da Silva (peter@NeoSoft.com) wrote: : : I seem to remember that there are patches out that let you put the bad sector : table at other offsets, but I don't now if they're NetBSD-only or not. The : ideal solution would be to make it a bad-sector partition like in System V, : but I've been told (and I quite believe) that that would require WAY too much : hacking to make it worthwhile in the near term. And long-term everyone's : going to logically-perfect drives using SCSI or IDE (though that begs the : question of what you do when you get NEW bad sectors... if the drive : automatically remaps them you get invisible file-system corruption, and if : it doesn't you still need bad sector handling). I have an IDE drive. Does that mean I don't need to mess around with this bad sector forwarding? Should my drive be doing all this automatically?