• Recent
    • Unsolved
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Popular
    Log in to post
    • All Time
    • Day
    • Week
    • Month
    • All Topics
    • New Topics
    • Watched Topics
    • Unreplied Topics
    • All categories
    • B

      Unable to Capture an image: ERROR: Could not adjust the bad sector list

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved FOG Problems
      5
      0 Votes
      5 Posts
      74 Views
      Tom ElliottT

      @bond007fink I want to push back on the conclusion being drawn here.

      There are multiple workarounds mentioned in this thread, and at least one other user has already pointed out that this behavior correlates with recent Microsoft updates. That strongly suggests a change in how Windows is laying out or flagging the filesystem — not a regression in FOG itself.

      FOG does not implement NTFS.
      FOG does not write partclone.
      FOG orchestrates existing, well-established tooling to capture and deploy disk images.

      When Microsoft changes disk metadata behavior in a way that causes ntfsclone/partclone to behave differently, that does not automatically make it a “FOG bug.” At best, it’s an upstream compatibility issue; at worst, it’s Windows leaving the filesystem in a state that violates assumptions those tools rely on.

      For something to be classified as a FOG bug, it needs to meet at least one of the following:

      A regression introduced by a FOG code change Incorrect parameters being passed to the underlying tooling A failure in FOG’s logic that independently causes the issue

      None of that has been demonstrated here.

      If someone can provide

      A reproducible case across systems Debug runs showing FOG invoking tooling incorrectly Evidence that FOG’s behavior changed independent of OS updates.

      then I’m happy to investigate it as a FOG issue.

      But attributing “FOG needs to fix this” to what appears to be an upstream file-system behavior change isn’t accurate, and it doesn’t help move the problem toward an actual solution.

      To be clear: I don’t mind helping fix problems - even upstream or compatibility issues - if there’s a clear, reproducible failure that can be attributed to something FOG controls.

      What I do mind is hand-waving the problem away with “FOG needs to fix this” without showing:

      how to reliably reproduce it what changed that caused it or where FOG itself is behaving incorrectly.

      Saying it works if I use an older image or it started after recent Windows updates is useful diagnostic information - but it points away from FOG being the root cause, not toward it.

      If someone can demonstrate that:

      FOG is passing incorrect parameters FOG logic regressed or FOG can reasonably detect and mitigate a specific file-system condition.

      then I’m happy to look at code or tooling changes.

      Until then, attributing this to “FOG needing to fix something” is a conclusion without evidence.

    • K

      Dell 3120 Imaging Failure

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved FOG Problems
      1
      0 Votes
      1 Posts
      5 Views
      No one has replied
    • G

      Issue when I tried to make Windows 11 gold image

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved Windows Problems
      5
      0 Votes
      5 Posts
      170 Views
      G

      Hi Again guys

      I have some news about this problem.
      I found a work around.

      I change the file d1.fixed_size_partitions deleting the recovery Windows partition. This change generated and error when I made the deploy image in Client PC.
      But if I cancel the job in the CLI fog server and reset the client machine after fog show the error
      It boot ok.

      I’ll continue reading …
      Thanks

    • F

      Possible rEFInd bug booting to Linux?

      Watching Ignoring Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved FOG Problems
      1
      0 Votes
      1 Posts
      77 Views
      No one has replied
    • 1 / 1