On Saturday 2004-08-28 14:12, Brian Fahrlander wrote: > 80G drive[s ] were just showing up on the seen well, whether things were "on the scene" or "on the screen", they were NOT "on the seen". > Shouldn't I have had _some_ notification? There is only one valid "should": "there should be no shoulds". > Isn't this what smartd was designed to identify? SMARTd doesn't identify anything. It only reports what the firmware in the drive identifies. If you had a SCSI drive, it's no surprise... SMART wasn't as developed on them historically. On any kind of OLD drive, SMART was not as smart as SMART is today. In my experience, mostly with SCSI drives, they always were smart enough to whine loudly before failure: of the spindle bearings... reaching rotational failure before any other kind of failure... and I was smart enough to heed the warning and replace the drive before it became unreadable. Now can we please get back on topic? -- Copyright 2004 Angela Kahealani. All rights reserved without prejudice; UCC1-207. All information and transactions are non negotiable and are private between the parties. http://www.kahealani.com/
