25

So I run fsck, and it reports 

FATs differ but appear to be intact. Use which FAT ?
1) Use first FAT
2) Use second FAT

Choosing either one gives a long list of errors like 

Cluster 1471730 out of range (164977891 > 1980013). Setting to EOF.
Cluster 1471732 out of range (252397720 > 1980013). Setting to EOF.
Cluster 1471734 out of range (18601458 > 1980013). Setting to EOF.

Then it says, 

Reclaimed 93886 unused clusters (769114112 bytes).
Free cluster summary wrong (1034047 vs. really 1221912)
1) Correct
2) Don't correct

If I choose (1), it just exits with no action: 

Leaving file system unchanged.
/dev/sdb1: 53 files, 758100/1980012 clusters

So how do I fix this?

Improve this question

6 Answers 6

Reset to default
23

After unmounting the USB volume, you'll want to use fsck with the '-w' switch which forces fsck to immediately write changes. Note that '-w' requires '-a' (auto mode) or '-r' (interactive mode).

Improve this answer
1
  • I really miss -w option! +1
    – gavenkoa
    Nov 25, 2013 at 22:22
9

man fsck.vfat says:

Note: If -a and -r are absent, the filesystem is only checked, but not repaired.

So, to have it actually write your changes use either -a or -r. The -w option modifies the behaviour of those two.

Improve this answer
7

Look at the fsck man page. Maybe try -r option or leave the -n if you used it.

Another possibility is that the partition is completely full. Check this.

By the way, it would be very helpful to post the exactly command that you used.

Improve this answer
0
1

In addition to passing -w -r like user130302 said, I had to run fsck.vfat with the partition mounted so that fsck would be able to write the found clusters (into FSCK000n.REC files).

Improve this answer
1
  • Wow, this goes against everything I would have thought about fsck, but doing this on my sd card kept prompting me to correct an issue with free cluster size. Despite choosing to correct, it did the same upon subsequent checks. Mounting caught a dirty bit in addition to cluster issue and fixed both (finally checks clean now).
    – Hendy
    Jan 10, 2021 at 0:18
0

I had the same issue. I eventually got it to work just by using the dosfsck command directly rather than using fsck (which is just a wrapper for all of the various fsck tools). I guess when fsck calls dosfsck it adds some options which cause it to fail to work correctly.

Improve this answer
0

I had the same problem, inspired of the answer from user258400 i used directly:

fsck.fat -r /dev/sde1

instead of:

fsck -r /dev/sde1

which did the trick

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .