"One or more disks are failing" from Palimpsest Disk Utility

Bug #477280 reported by Clementi
68
This bug affects 13 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
gnome-disk-utility (Ubuntu)
Confirmed
Low
Unassigned

Bug Description

Binary package hint: nautilus

After installing ubuntu 9.10 on my laptop, I had this message "One or more disks are failing" coming from Palimpsest Disk Utility. It reports that my disk has many bad sectors but in fact my disk is finely ok.... what should I do?

ProblemType: Bug
Architecture: i386
Date: Sat Nov 7 17:38:30 2009
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 9.10
ExecutablePath: /usr/bin/nautilus
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 9.10 "Karmic Koala" - Release i386 (20091028.5)
Package: nautilus 1:2.28.1-0ubuntu1
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_PH.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.31-14.48-generic
SourcePackage: nautilus
Uname: Linux 2.6.31-14-generic i686

Revision history for this message
Clementi (edsn-card) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

Thank you for your bug report, what makes you think the warning are wrongs

affects: nautilus (Ubuntu) → gnome-disk-utility (Ubuntu)
affects: gnome-disk-utility (Ubuntu) → nautilus (Ubuntu)
affects: nautilus (Ubuntu) → gnome-disk-utility (Ubuntu)
Changed in gnome-disk-utility (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Low
zackpuse (palie-zas82)
Changed in gnome-disk-utility (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
TiagoCruz (tiagocruz) wrote :

We have 10 notebooks (Dell Latitude E4300) all with Ubuntu 9.10 (5 32 bits, and 5 64 bits).

All with this problem. I don't belive that all 10 HD's are failing =D

Revision history for this message
TiagoCruz (tiagocruz) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Manni (ubuntu-lxxi) wrote :

I have a similar issue and since the bios smart utility isn't reporting any errors, I prefer to simply rely on backups and not trust Palimpsest.

What I find particularly irritating about this is that I have no idea what the utility is trying to tell me. Tiago's screenshot illustrates this nicely. I can fathom what a threshold is here, but "Normalized" and "Worst"? How do these relate to the actual value?

Revision history for this message
newacct (newacct) wrote :

SMART only has "passed" and "failed" for each attribute; no such thing as "warning". The number of reallocated sectors that is bad varies much from drive to drive; Palimpsest is not qualified to make up a threshold itself and apply to all drives, even when those drives' manufacturers have decided that it is fine.

@Manni: For your information, the "normalized" is the current "score" for this attribute. As things get worse, the score will go down, when the score goes below the "threshold", SMART will report it as "failed". The "worst" is the worst score that the drive has gotten in the past (e.g. highest temperature, etc.), for things where the drive has subsequently improved. For Tiago's screenshot, his normalized score of 100 is very far from the threshold of 0, which means the number of reallocated sectors is still very far from being a critical problem.

Revision history for this message
sam tygier (samtygier) wrote :

do you still have this problem? i get a message for a disk where the spin up times is get worse, but no message for a disk that has had a few bad sectors for a long time.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.