smartd wont start

Downloaded and compiled smartmon v5.32 ok
on initla startup it fails:
    Starting smartd: execvp: No such file or directory
What does it mean? How do i fix it?
Thanks
Eric

-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: smartmontools RPM

On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Dan Fandrich wrote:

> I just tried installing smartmontools-5.33-1.i386.rpm on my Red Hat 7.2
> box, but I got a dependency error "libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) is needed", despite
> the description "This RPM file is compatible with all RedHat releases back
> to at least 6.2".  Red Hat 7.2 is supplied with glibc 2.2.4.

Dan,

You're right -- I'm sorry. When I upgraded the OS on my laptop (where I
build these) the dependency on glibC changed.

You should be able to get the source RPM and use that to rebuild the RPM
for your machine.

Cheers,
	Bruce

-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: Finding an error reported by selftest

Mike Brodbelt wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-12-24 at 23:17 +1000, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
> 
> Ok - finally got back to my normal machine to test this...
> 
> 
>>Bad sectors observed when the disk was produced are placed
>>in the primary defect list. Any sectors found thereafter
>>are placed in the "grown" defect list. If you get the sg3_utils
>>(version 1.11) from http://www.torque.net/sg then try
>>'sginfo -G /dev/sdb' with various "-F<arg>" options.
> 
> 
> # sginfo -G -Fphysical /dev/sdb
> INQUIRY reponse (cmd: 0x12)
> ---------------------------
> Device Type                        0
> Vendor:                    IBM     
> Product:                   DDYS-T18350N    
> Revision level:            S96H
> 
> Defect Lists
> ------------
> 
> 14 entries (112 bytes) in grown table.
> Format (5) is: physical blocks [Cyl:Head:Sect]
> Sector -1 marks whole track as bad.
> 
>   1300: 5:  260| 14600: 4:  262| 14600: 4:  264| 14600: 4:  276| 14600: 4:  293
>  14600: 4:  300| 14600: 4:  302| 14600: 4:    1| 14600: 4:    4| 14600: 4:    9

SMART error (CurrentPendingSector) detected on host: sombrero

I'm getting the following at boot from one of our machines:

This email was generated by the smartd daemon running on:

    host name: sombrero
   DNS domain: cora.nwra.com
   NIS domain: yp.colorado-research.com

The following warning/error was logged by the smartd daemon:

Device: /dev/hda, 1 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors

For details see host's SYSLOG (default: /var/log/messages).

You can also use the smartctl utility for further investigation.
No additional email messages about this problem will be sent.

--

  It appears that this is an old condition, though I'm not sure.  Is 
there any way to clear it?  Thanks!

[root <at> sombrero ~]# smartctl -a /dev/hda
smartctl version 5.33 [i386-redhat-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-4 Bruce 
Allen
Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/

=== START OF INFORMATION SECTION ===
Device Model:     IBM-DARA-212000
Serial Number:    AH0AH1Z6434

Re: SMART error (CurrentPendingSector) detected on host: sombrero

On some disks you can clear it: see smartmontools web page FAQ for
pointers.

Bruce

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Orion Poplawski wrote:

> I'm getting the following at boot from one of our machines:
> 
> This email was generated by the smartd daemon running on:
> 
>     host name: sombrero
>    DNS domain: cora.nwra.com
>    NIS domain: yp.colorado-research.com
> 
> The following warning/error was logged by the smartd daemon:
> 
> Device: /dev/hda, 1 Currently unreadable (pending) sectors
> 
> For details see host's SYSLOG (default: /var/log/messages).
> 
> You can also use the smartctl utility for further investigation.
> No additional email messages about this problem will be sent.
> 
> 
> --
> 
>   It appears that this is an old condition, though I'm not sure.  Is 
> there any way to clear it?  Thanks!
> 

Reallocationg Offline_Uncorrectable sectors (repost)

Perhaps I misunderstood something, but I'm unable to reallocate
offline_uncorrectable sectors with the method described
in badblockhowto.

The disk currently is a member of a raid1 array. I have found the
"bad" blocks around the reported sector with the following command:

export i=139735500 && while [ $i -lt 139735600 ]; do echo $i; dd
if=/dev/hdb of=/dev/null bs=512 count=1 skip=$i; let i+=1; done

I have removed the partition (not the whole disk) from raid1 array
(raidsetfaulty && raidhotremove) and I have zeroed the sectors and
soon the whole partition (with sync!) but nothing had happened. I have
executed smartctl -t offline /dev/hdb when finished smartctl -t long
/dev/hdb but I still have errors when I executing the script that I
mentioned earlier:

139735510
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
139735511
dd: reading `/dev/hdb': Input/output error
0+0 records in
0+0 records out
139735512
dd: reading `/dev/hdb': Input/output error
0+0 records in
0+0 records out
[..]

Re: Reallocationg Offline_Uncorrectable sectors (repost)

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 00:47:48 +0100,
  Zoltan Podlovics <zoltan.podlovics <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps I misunderstood something, but I'm unable to reallocate
> offline_uncorrectable sectors with the method described
> in badblockhowto.
> 
> The disk currently is a member of a raid1 array. I have found the
> "bad" blocks around the reported sector with the following command:
> 
> export i=139735500 && while [ $i -lt 139735600 ]; do echo $i; dd
> if=/dev/hdb of=/dev/null bs=512 count=1 skip=$i; let i+=1; done
> 
> I have removed the partition (not the whole disk) from raid1 array
> (raidsetfaulty && raidhotremove) and I have zeroed the sectors and
> soon the whole partition (with sync!) but nothing had happened. I have
> executed smartctl -t offline /dev/hdb when finished smartctl -t long
> /dev/hdb but I still have errors when I executing the script that I
> mentioned earlier:
> 
> 139735510
> 1+0 records in
> 1+0 records out
> 139735511
> dd: reading `/dev/hdb': Input/output error
> 0+0 records in
> 0+0 records out
> 139735512
> dd: reading `/dev/hdb': Input/output error
> 0+0 records in
> 0+0 records out

email

Re: Reallocationg Offline_Uncorrectable sectors (repost)

I tried it with 4096 blocksize but still I have almost the same errors:

export i=17466938 && while [ $i -lt 17466950 ]; do echo $i; dd
if=/dev/hdb of=/dev/null bs=4096 count=1 skip=$i; let i+=1; done
17466938
dd: reading `/dev/hdb': Input/output error
0+0 records in
0+0 records out
17466939
dd: reading `/dev/hdb': Input/output error
0+0 records in
0+0 records out
17466940
dd: reading `/dev/hdb': Input/output error
0+0 records in
0+0 records out
17466941
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466942
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466943
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466944
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466945
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466946
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466947
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466948
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
17466949
1+0 records in
1+0 records out

Regards,
Zoltan

> The above suggests that the OS is handling blocks using a size larger than
> 512 bytes and that to write a partial block it is doing a read first which
> fails because of the bad sector. Try using a blocksize of 4096. You will
> need to divide the sector numbers by 8 when you do this.
>

-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt

Re: Reallocationg Offline_Uncorrectable sectors (repost)

> I tried it with 4096 blocksize but still I have almost the same errors:

Didn't you say this disk was in a raid1 (mirror)? The easiest way to
make sure all the dubious blocks are overwritten is to remove it from
the raid, then add it in again, thus making sure the whole partition
gets written again. Didn't you already do this? If so, it seems to me
that either your raid setup is dodgy or your disk is distinctly stuffed.
Does the area of bad blocks get bigger? If so, throw the disk out now.

Volker

--

-- 
Volker Kuhlmann			is possibly list0570 with the domain in header
http://volker.dnsalias.net/		Please do not CC list postings to me.

-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt