My user account doesnt have sudo despite being in sudoers. I cant run new commands i have to execute the binary. Grub takes very long to load with "welcome to grub" message. I just wanted a stable distro as arch broke and currupted my external ssd

  • mariah@feddit.rocksOP
    21·
    1 year ago

    Sorry i was using sh. This is the output

    fsck: error 2 (No such file or directory) while executing fsck.ext2 for /dev/sdd1
    • tal@lemmy.today
      2·
      1 year ago

      Sorry i was using sh.

      Ah, okay, that makes more sense.

      On my system, looks like fsck.ext2 is a symlink to e2fsck, which is provided by the e2fsprogs package:

      $ type fsck.ext2
fsck.ext2 is /sbin/fsck.ext2
$ dpkg -S /sbin/fsck.ext2
e2fsprogs: /sbin/fsck.ext2

      Can you try:

      # apt install e2fsprogs

      And then run:

      # fsck /dev/sdd1

      Again?

        • tal@lemmy.today
          2·
          1 year ago

          rubs chin

          Okay. "error 2 (No such file or directory)" is the error code that perror() will print when it gets ENOENT.

          checks

          One way you can get that is if you attempt to execute a file that isn't there, or execute or open a symlink that has a target that's missing. Could be that fsck.ext2 is missing or is a symlink, and that the e2fsck binary that it points to isn't there.

          On my system, I get this:

          $ ls -l /sbin/fsck.ext2 /sbin/e2fsck
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 356624 Sep  8 00:47 /sbin/e2fsck
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      6 Sep  8 00:47 /sbin/fsck.ext2 -> e2fsck

          Do you get something like that as well?

          If they aren't there, you can force reinstallation of e2fsprogs with # apt install --reinstall e2fsprogs and if the files are missing, that should add them, but I don't know how one could wind up in a situation where the package database thinks that the package is installed but that the binaries aren't present on a fresh Debian install.

            • tal@lemmy.today
              2·
              1 year ago

              Okay, though I had an idea as to what should cause that, but no, not it. I deleted my response shortly after posting it, if you already saw it.

              Hmm. Well, how about this. It should be possible to run e2fsck directly, and you say that the binary is present. Try:

              # /sbin/e2fsck /dev/sdd1

              If it says something about /dev/sdd1 being mounted, then don't go ahead with the scan; you've got the wrong partition in that case.

              • mariah@feddit.rocksOP
                2·
                1 year ago

                Attempt to read block from filesystem resulted in short read while trying to open /dev/sdd1 Could this be a zero-length partition?

                • tal@lemmy.today
                  2·
                  1 year ago

                  fsck is probably wrong in guessing that it's a zero-length partition; I would be more-inclined to guess that a read error caused it not to be able to read anything.

                  # parted /dev/sdd print

                  That should display the partition table on the drive, as well as the lengths of the partition. My guess is that it'll just show that you have a 4.5TB partition. Probably starts at something like 1MB and ends at something like 4500GB.

                  Linux was able to read from the drive enough to get at the partition table on it, or the lsblk output you had above in that image wouldn't be able to show the partition.

                  But I'd guess that it's hitting read errors in trying to read from the drive, and that the way that this is percolating up to fsck is fsck asking for N bytes and getting back only the bytes that it could read before it hit the error.

                  It's maybe not impossible that an invalid partition table could produce that error. And maybe e2fsck is trying to read off the end of the device or something because the filesystem on the partition is messed up, but I'm biased towards to thinking that it's more-likely that the drive is failing.

                  The first option I'm normally going to take when maybe a hard drive is dying is:

                  # smartctl -a /dev/sdd

                  As long as the drive supports SMART, that'll tell you whether the drive thinks that it's failing. That won't catch everything, but if the drive doesn't give itself a clean bill of health, then I wouldn't either.

                  If the kernel is trying to read data from a drive and seeing errors, it'll probably show up in the kernel log.

                  # dmesg | grep sdd

                  Should show you errors in the kernel log from the current boot relating to that drive.

                  If you don't see any errors there, then I'd be inclined to see whether it's possible to read the contents of the partition and whether that can do so. Something like – and be very careful not to reverse the "if" (input file) and "of" (output file) parameters here, because dd can write to a drive and if typed incorrectly, this can overwrite your drive's contents:

                  # dd if=/dev/sdd1 status=progress of=/dev/null

                  That'll just try reading from the beginning of the partition, giving you updates as it goes to let you know how much it's read, and then just dump the data into /dev/null. If it fails to read data at some point, it should bail out way before 4.5TB. Probably don't want to wait for the whole partition to be read, though, because 4.5TB is gonna take a while.

                  If dd can read the contents of the partition, then I assume that e2fsck should be able to as well.

                  If dd can read the data, then I'd assume that something is wrong with the filesystem, or at least the data on the partition, and it'd make sense to look at that.

                  If dd can't read the data, then I'd be inclined to blame hardware (or maybe the partition table), since nothing inside the partition itself, including the filesystem, should be able to make dd fail to read the contents of the partition; dd doesn't actually pay any attention to the data that it's reading.

                  • mariah@feddit.rocksOP
                    3·
                    1 year ago

                    The commands were fine but dd.

                    8192 bytes (8.2 kB, 8.0 KiB) copied, 21 s, 0.4 kB/s
dd: error reading '/dev/sdd1': Input/output error
16+0 records in
16+0 records out
8192 bytes (8.2 kB, 8.0 KiB) copied, 28.0116 s, 0.3 kB/s