On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 12:03 -0500, eliwap wrote: > k... smartd did indeed report a problem. Drat. > ...but it did find it! smartd is light-weight in its resource use, at least I've never noticed any slow-downs I could blame on it, so IMO installing and enabling it on all Linux boxes is a no-brainer. I have it set up to generate and mail me reports on a weekly basis. > So now currently I am running: > > badblocks -v /dev/mapper/vg_computer-lv_root > bad-blocks > > I intend to then run: > > fsck -l bad-blocks /dev/mapper/vg_computer-lv_root > bad-blocks > Shouldn't that be: fsck -l bad-blocks /dev/mapper/vg_computer-lv_root I think your shell redirection would clear the badblocks list in preparation for writing to it, so you'd empty the file before fsck could apply it. If I am making a mistake, or there is a better way to do this, then I would greatly appreciate any advise. I might have run fsck with the -c option, which gets passed through to e2fsck. This combines both operations - it runs badblocks internally, applies anything it finds to the badblocks list and then (presumably) checks the filing structure. Martin
