"Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:55rd18F268u5nU3@mid.individual.net
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> writes:
> > > Do I have to repeat it for you: *They won't show with only writing*.

Crucial line reinserted:
> > > *To detect any new you need to read the drive, not write it*.

> > Yes, thanks, that helped.

> As usual, Folkert is wrong.

And as usual you are so immensely stupid and eager to make a fool of yourself
that you don't even notice that you repeat at the end what I said, babblebot.

> They may or may not show up as "pending" in the SMART attributes,
> but after writing they will show up as reallocated defects in SMART.

Only the pending ones, your babblebotness. Only the ones you *already know of*.
And no, not all pending ones will be reassigned, as the drive will read check them
after writing and they may well prove to be good afterall, after that.

> They will not before if the drive failed to read them.

And that is exactly what makes them pending, you babblebot moron.
Only then will they *show* as pending in the SMART attribute list.
Writes to possibly bad sectors that the drive is yet to know of will go without any
action and may still be bad after. On the other hand they may also be cured by it.
But the drive will still be unaware of them.

Which is what I said in the previous post and what got conveniently snipped.
As usual you haven't got a clue what was being discussed.

The question was: does he need to write to the drive to see new bads
(possible bads he obviously isn't yet aware of) and get rid of them.
Since he isn't aware of problems there are no current pending ones.
So the answer was: No, you need to read first to catch them as pending,

>
> Arno