Understanding SeaTool results of different HDD checks

[BetaBob]

Hello,

I have an external SATA HDD from Samsung and after cloning my entire internal HDD (with Clonezilla) to the external drive, I found some differences in 5 unreadable files (with TotalCommander) on the external drive.
So I thought it might be good to search for bad blocks. For this I found the tool from Seagate: SeaTool and scanned the external drive. The result confuses me:
In the "Short Drive Self Test" the drive FAILED at about 75%. So I tought a repair would be senseful.
In the "Fix All - Long" process the drive also FAILED at about 90%.
But in the "Long Generic" test it PASSED.
How can that be? What does that mean? I tried to get some help at the Seagate community, but their forum seems to be in trouble as there was a message "down for maintanance" since some days.

Kind Regards
P.S: I used SeaTools for Windows v1.4.0.2 in the German version

 

[muckshifter]

Any 'bad sectors' then replace the drive, I wouldn't bother 'fixing' especially on a old drive.

I suggest you try ... CHKDSK /f ... on both drives.

 

[BetaBob]

Hello muckshifter,

I did the CHKDSK /f on the 4 windows partitions of the external drive (3 x NTFS, 1 x FAT32) and there were no errors found. However, there are also Linux partitions, which I cannot check with CHKDSK, or? And there must be also a lot of free space, because my internal drive is 250 GB and I cloned it to the 1 TB external drive.
But the errors after cloning were on the FAT32 drive. After I found them by comparing all files, I deleted the 5 unreadable files on the external drive and copied them manually from the internal to the external drive. After this procedure there content of the dirves was identical. So I assume this somehow relocated the files so that they were not on bad blocks anymore. I suspect that maybe Clonezilla does not obey the bad blocks that are listed in the external drive's memory and just stupidly clones everything to the same sectors. But the manual copying in Windows obeys the bad sector list and excludes the bad blocks during copying, which is quite clever.

Does anyone have similar experience with cloning tools??? Some hints on other coloning or backup tool that are maybe more clever than Clonezilla?

 

[muckshifter]

I use the "tools" of the hard drive manufacturer. One drive manufacturer, the name escapes me for the moment, actually uses a licenced copy of Acronis True Image for their tools. ATI would be my recommendation for a 3rd party alternative.

I certainly wouldn't use FAT32 on any hard drive.


oh, if CHKDSK found no errors, then there is nothing wrong.