My hdd won't mount - how can I tell how much data is on it & how might I get it to mount?
Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
The hdd may have a lot of data on it or it might not have any data on it which might explain why there is no partition on it. The hdd is relatively new (less 1 year) and if it has been used, it has been very rarely used other than to have added data to it.
The hdd may have a lot of data on it or it might not have any data on it which might explain why there is no partition on it. The hdd is relatively new (less 1 year) and if it has been used, it has been very rarely used other than to have added data to it.
sdb has no partitions and no recognizable filesystem. That's why you can't mount it.
It also has no LVM or MD RAID structures. lsblk would report them.
Are you trying to access the disk through a Sabrent docking station? If this is the case then I wonder if what you're seeing is the docking station being reported rather than the actual disk.
For example, an empty dual disk docking station on my RasPi thinks there's /dev/sda attached but there's no drive:
Code:
[3612765.678051] usb 2-1: new SuperSpeed Gen 1 USB device number 3 using xhci_hcd
[3612765.708952] usb 2-1: New USB device found, idVendor=174c, idProduct=55aa, bcdDevice= 1.00
[3612765.708971] usb 2-1: New USB device strings: Mfr=2, Product=3, SerialNumber=1
[3612765.708987] usb 2-1: Product: ASM1156-PM
[3612765.709002] usb 2-1: Manufacturer: ASMT
[3612765.709016] usb 2-1: SerialNumber: 00000000000000000000
[3612765.712413] usb-storage 2-1:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected
[3612765.712773] usb-storage 2-1:1.0: Quirks match for vid 174c pid 55aa: 400000
[3612765.713647] scsi host0: usb-storage 2-1:1.0
[3612766.778266] scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access ASMT ASM1156-PM 0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
[3612766.779013] sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
[3612766.829328] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI removable disk
Are you trying to access the disk through a Sabrent docking station? If this is the case then I wonder if what you're seeing is the docking station being reported rather than the actual disk.
For example, an empty dual disk docking station on my RasPi thinks there's /dev/sda attached but there's no drive:
Code:
[3612765.678051] usb 2-1: new SuperSpeed Gen 1 USB device number 3 using xhci_hcd
[3612765.708952] usb 2-1: New USB device found, idVendor=174c, idProduct=55aa, bcdDevice= 1.00
[3612765.708971] usb 2-1: New USB device strings: Mfr=2, Product=3, SerialNumber=1
[3612765.708987] usb 2-1: Product: ASM1156-PM
[3612765.709002] usb 2-1: Manufacturer: ASMT
[3612765.709016] usb 2-1: SerialNumber: 00000000000000000000
[3612765.712413] usb-storage 2-1:1.0: USB Mass Storage device detected
[3612765.712773] usb-storage 2-1:1.0: Quirks match for vid 174c pid 55aa: 400000
[3612765.713647] scsi host0: usb-storage 2-1:1.0
[3612766.778266] scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access ASMT ASM1156-PM 0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
[3612766.779013] sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0
[3612766.829328] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI removable disk
Yes, but i need to know if there is data on there. If there isn't, then i can setup the partition, etc.
parted has a rescue command that looks for lost patitions. You can also use strings to find something on the disk. For example, pipe the output of strings to a dictionary.
If these simple approaches don't help, I would search for forensics tools that analyze disks. While most of those tools are likely to require a certain skill level that I definitely don't have, perhaps you can start with SIFT.
There is also PhotoRec. In spite of its name, it recovers any kind of files.
Last edited by berndbausch; 11-25-2020 at 05:50 PM.
parted has a rescue command that looks for lost patitions. You can also use strings to find something on the disk. For example, pipe the output of strings to a dictionary.
If these simple approaches don't help, I would search for forensics tools that analyze disks. While most of those tools are likely to require a certain skill level that I definitely don't have, perhaps you can start with SIFT.
There is also PhotoRec. In spite of its name, it recovers any kind of files.
I went into gparted and click under 'device' on 'data rescue' but got the following message. I tried it numerous times.
Code:
COMMAND GPART NOT FOUND: this feature uses gpart. PLease install gpart and try again.
PHOTOREC says it will take like 100 hours to analyze.
Without a filesystem it is impossible to know how much "data" is on the drive. If it just so happens the partition table was deleted and the underlying filesystem / data was still intact in most instances it can be restored.
Typically data is never deleted. When a file is "deleted" by the operating system its location is marked a unused. Eventually that disk location will be overwritten by another file but until then it exists and so searching for files might turn up lots of unwanted stuff.
Finding data is like searching for a needle in a haystack. Photorec searches the drive byte for byte looking for certain patterns that could be a valid file, so yes it will take a very long time.
This is not an easy task which is why you will see many many posts that having good backups is very important especially if you have stuff that you really do not want to lose. Since you have no idea if the drive has any data or not, used or not seems like a waste of time unless there is more to the story.
Without a filesystem it is impossible to know how much "data" is on the drive. If it just so happens the partition table was deleted and the underlying filesystem / data was still intact in most instances it can be restored.
Typically data is never deleted. When a file is "deleted" by the operating system its location is marked a unused. Eventually that disk location will be overwritten by another file but until then it exists and so searching for files might turn up lots of unwanted stuff.
Finding data is like searching for a needle in a haystack. Photorec searches the drive byte for byte looking for certain patterns that could be a valid file, so yes it will take a very long time.
This is not an easy task which is why you will see many many posts that having good backups is very important especially if you have stuff that you really do not want to lose. Since you have no idea if the drive has any data or not, used or not seems like a waste of time unless there is more to the story.
If there is data on the hdd then the hdd was used without me first creating a partition table /partition....almost definitely.
Use parted, the command line command. Or install gpart, as the message says (I have no idea what gpart is)
That's just four days. Shorter than waiting for an answer on Linuxquestions.
I once set up a server with MD RAID. Took a week to synchronize.
I'm thinking, correctly or otherwise, that if there was data put on the disk (and if there was, nothing was likely deleted being that it is a new hdd), that the data would be on the BEGINNING of the hdd and if photorec searches for an hour or a few and doesnt' find anything, then there is likely nothing on the drive.
I'm thinking, correctly or otherwise, that if there was data put on the disk (and if there was, nothing was likely deleted being that it is a new hdd), that the data would be on the BEGINNING of the hdd and if photorec searches for an hour or a few and doesnt' find anything, then there is likely nothing on the drive.
Is this logical?
No, this is based on assumptions. The biggest assumption being Photorec's mode of operation.
Having said that, if you put a filesystem on the non-partitioned disk, a superblock (or, depending on the filesystem type, an equivalent structure) should be right at the beginning. Judging from what you have reported, I doubt very much that this disk is formatted with a filesystem.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
