Is it possible to fix number of sectors in the USB enclosure?
0
I have a LUKS-encrypted external USB hard drive (1TB HGST Touro S). If I put the drive into the new USB enclosure, it reduces the number of sectors by 1 and I cannot mount the filesystem anymore.
Is there a way to fix it without reformatting of HDD?
In the old USB enclosure:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdd
Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdd doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788864 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521072 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
/dev/mapper/touros_old: clean, 450506/61054976 files, 208726295/244190134 blocks
Now if I change the hard drive to the new USB enclosure, the following happens:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204885504 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525167 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdc doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788352 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521071 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 244190134 blocks
The physical size of the device is 244190133 blocks
Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt!
Abort<y>? yes
partitioning usb-storage partition-recovery luks sectors
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
add a comment |
0
I have a LUKS-encrypted external USB hard drive (1TB HGST Touro S). If I put the drive into the new USB enclosure, it reduces the number of sectors by 1 and I cannot mount the filesystem anymore.
Is there a way to fix it without reformatting of HDD?
In the old USB enclosure:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdd
Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdd doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788864 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521072 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
/dev/mapper/touros_old: clean, 450506/61054976 files, 208726295/244190134 blocks
Now if I change the hard drive to the new USB enclosure, the following happens:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204885504 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525167 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdc doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788352 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521071 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 244190134 blocks
The physical size of the device is 244190133 blocks
Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt!
Abort<y>? yes
partitioning usb-storage partition-recovery luks sectors
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
Is there anything special about the "new USB enclosure" you're using?
– duskwuff
Feb 21 at 20:26
no, just bought it online recently. Interestingly, my problem is kind of solved now, since I had one more HDD. Let's say HDD2 in enclosure B; and my original HDD1 was in enclosure A. Putting it to enclosure C did not work, but after I put HDD2 in enclosure C and HDD1 in enclosure B, everything works.
– Andrey Sapegin
Feb 21 at 20:51
add a comment |
0
0
0
I have a LUKS-encrypted external USB hard drive (1TB HGST Touro S). If I put the drive into the new USB enclosure, it reduces the number of sectors by 1 and I cannot mount the filesystem anymore.
Is there a way to fix it without reformatting of HDD?
In the old USB enclosure:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdd
Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdd doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788864 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521072 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
/dev/mapper/touros_old: clean, 450506/61054976 files, 208726295/244190134 blocks
Now if I change the hard drive to the new USB enclosure, the following happens:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204885504 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525167 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdc doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788352 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521071 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 244190134 blocks
The physical size of the device is 244190133 blocks
Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt!
Abort<y>? yes
partitioning usb-storage partition-recovery luks sectors
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
I have a LUKS-encrypted external USB hard drive (1TB HGST Touro S). If I put the drive into the new USB enclosure, it reduces the number of sectors by 1 and I cannot mount the filesystem anymore.
Is there a way to fix it without reformatting of HDD?
In the old USB enclosure:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdd
Disk /dev/sdd: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525168 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdd doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788864 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521072 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
/dev/mapper/touros_old: clean, 450506/61054976 files, 208726295/244190134 blocks
Now if I change the hard drive to the new USB enclosure, the following happens:
sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204885504 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953525167 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0xe8070000
Disk /dev/sdc doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fdisk -l /dev/mapper/touros_old
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old: 1000.2 GB, 1000202788352 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders, total 1953521071 sectors
Units = sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Disk /dev/mapper/touros_old doesn't contain a valid partition table
sudo fsck.ext4 /dev/mapper/touros_old
e2fsck 1.42.9 (4-Feb-2014)
The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 244190134 blocks
The physical size of the device is 244190133 blocks
Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt!
Abort<y>? yes
partitioning usb-storage partition-recovery luks sectors
partitioning usb-storage partition-recovery luks sectors
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
asked Feb 21 at 18:46
Andrey SapeginAndrey Sapegin
5313
5313
Is there anything special about the "new USB enclosure" you're using?
– duskwuff
Feb 21 at 20:26
no, just bought it online recently. Interestingly, my problem is kind of solved now, since I had one more HDD. Let's say HDD2 in enclosure B; and my original HDD1 was in enclosure A. Putting it to enclosure C did not work, but after I put HDD2 in enclosure C and HDD1 in enclosure B, everything works.
– Andrey Sapegin
Feb 21 at 20:51
add a comment |
Is there anything special about the "new USB enclosure" you're using?
– duskwuff
Feb 21 at 20:26
no, just bought it online recently. Interestingly, my problem is kind of solved now, since I had one more HDD. Let's say HDD2 in enclosure B; and my original HDD1 was in enclosure A. Putting it to enclosure C did not work, but after I put HDD2 in enclosure C and HDD1 in enclosure B, everything works.
– Andrey Sapegin
Feb 21 at 20:51
Is there anything special about the "new USB enclosure" you're using?
– duskwuff
Feb 21 at 20:26
Is there anything special about the "new USB enclosure" you're using?
– duskwuff
Feb 21 at 20:26
no, just bought it online recently. Interestingly, my problem is kind of solved now, since I had one more HDD. Let's say HDD2 in enclosure B; and my original HDD1 was in enclosure A. Putting it to enclosure C did not work, but after I put HDD2 in enclosure C and HDD1 in enclosure B, everything works.
– Andrey Sapegin
Feb 21 at 20:51
no, just bought it online recently. Interestingly, my problem is kind of solved now, since I had one more HDD. Let's say HDD2 in enclosure B; and my original HDD1 was in enclosure A. Putting it to enclosure C did not work, but after I put HDD2 in enclosure C and HDD1 in enclosure B, everything works.
– Andrey Sapegin
Feb 21 at 20:51
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1408253%2fis-it-possible-to-fix-number-of-sectors-in-the-usb-enclosure%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1408253%2fis-it-possible-to-fix-number-of-sectors-in-the-usb-enclosure%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Is there anything special about the "new USB enclosure" you're using?
– duskwuff
Feb 21 at 20:26
no, just bought it online recently. Interestingly, my problem is kind of solved now, since I had one more HDD. Let's say HDD2 in enclosure B; and my original HDD1 was in enclosure A. Putting it to enclosure C did not work, but after I put HDD2 in enclosure C and HDD1 in enclosure B, everything works.
– Andrey Sapegin
Feb 21 at 20:51