bug-ddrescue
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-ddrescue] how big should my MBR rescue be?


From: Ian Simmons
Subject: Re: [Bug-ddrescue] how big should my MBR rescue be?
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:09:08 -0400

Hi, I didn't add this in my last reply.

When I attempt to mount the rescued.img it tells me that it doesn't have
a valid ntfs. This is the same message I got when I tried to mount the
original hard drive.

Does this mean the file system is corrupted and needs to be restored in
the image? How do I go about getting the image to a state where I can
mount it to get the files from it? Will the linux file recovery tools
mentioned such as photorec/testdisk fix the ntfs of the image?


On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 15:29 -0400, James Bardin wrote:
> 
> Ian Simmons wrote:
> > 
> > The problem is that for some reason the first partition which is the
> > active windows partition starts at  133677. I ran it anyway and rescued
> > 1332 MB. Is it safe to assume that the MBR is in there somewhere?
> > 
> 
> No. The mbr is most likely still in the first sector, but if your not
> trying to make a bootable copy, then you don't need it.
> 
> 
> > I plan on installing a fresh copy of Windows to the drive which has a
> > invalid ntfs,
> 
> I hope you're not planning on installing on the same drive that's
> already failed?
> 
> 
> > and all I'm trying to do is rescue files. When the rescue
> > of /dev/sdh1 is finished will it be possible to mount the backup.img and
> > just copy the files out of it or will I need to use ddrescue to restore
> > the image to a drive?
> 
> It depends on whether the filesystem is intact. If you're lucky, you'll
> be able to simply mount the rescue image and copy files. If not, you'll
> need to rebuild the files with a recovery tool. ddrescue only does the copy.
> 
> 
> > 
> > Also, I am using ddrescue because I read that it works faster by doing
> > what dd_rhelp and dd_rescue accomplish by getting the good sectors
> > first. It is working at the same slow pace of 130kb per second as
> > dd_recue did. It has been running over 24 hours to rescue only 4 Gigs
> > and reports not one bad sector so far. Is this normal?
> > 
> 
> Not usually, but it depends on what's wrong with your drive.
> 
> -jim
> 
> 
> 





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]