On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 12:33:33PM -0700, Fred Cisin wrote:
> >> I suppose that bad sector maps for ST506/412 hard drives don't count? :-)
Once upon a time, it was the job of the OS to take this badblock count
and remap blocks itself since the drives themselves weren't smart enough.
>
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2015, ben wrote:
> > If is that bad, time for a new drive.
> In the early days, particularly when actual ST506 and ST412 were common
> drives, there were VERY VERY few that had no bad tracks.
>
> In the days of ST506/412 drives every responsible manufacturer included a
> list of bad tracks. In the early days, there were plenty. That was one
> of several reasons why reputable hard drive manufacturers rounded the
> capacity down, rather than peddling them with the size stated to half a
> dozen "significant" digits. Would you rather have a "10 Meg" drive that
> formatted out to 10.1Mebibytes, or one that formatted to 10.1Mebibytes
> that was sold as being "10.653696 Meg" ("WOW! This drive is so good that
> it gave me MORE capacity than it was rated for!")
>
>
> For a brief while, Spinrite defaulted to retoring to service any BAD
> TRACKS that passed Spinrite's tests! That was based on the assumption
> that a simple read/write test is surely far more trustworthy than the
> special hardware and software that the manufacturer used to decide to
> tell you not to trust that track.
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
>
--
- d...@freebsd.org d...@db.net http://www.db.net/~db
