EDIT: ".. FAX cluster" -> typo, meaning "when searching with FAT1-start 1 (or 0)" - this seems to be a sector number.
One has to enter a potential sector number for the FAT table(s to start this directory scan. I also tried FAT1 location 32 and 64 after reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design ...
Search found 3 matches
- 11 Feb 2021, 16:54
- Forum: Partition Recovery
- Topic: Better micro SD 32GB recovery where PhotoRec gets a lot messy pieces/names?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 4269
- 10 Feb 2021, 21:48
- Forum: Partition Recovery
- Topic: Better micro SD 32GB recovery where PhotoRec gets a lot messy pieces/names?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 4269
Re: Better micro SD 32GB recovery where PhotoRec gets a lot messy pieces/names?
Thanks
I already made a image within testdisk itself, w/o read errors, and I'm trying on that image. Is there an advantage of using ddrescue in addition?
Your card or partition might be encrypted.
Unlikely, I think: PhotoRec files were already found.
And with "None" parti table type, Type ...
I already made a image within testdisk itself, w/o read errors, and I'm trying on that image. Is there an advantage of using ddrescue in addition?
Your card or partition might be encrypted.
Unlikely, I think: PhotoRec files were already found.
And with "None" parti table type, Type ...
- 10 Feb 2021, 15:35
- Forum: Partition Recovery
- Topic: Better micro SD 32GB recovery where PhotoRec gets a lot messy pieces/names?
- Replies: 4
- Views: 4269
Better micro SD 32GB recovery where PhotoRec gets a lot messy pieces/names?
Samsung 32GB micro SD card, some 4 years old, mainly just added files. Only used in Android phone, no swapping.
Somehow it became invalid in the Android phone. no real idea why.? Problem with low voltage? phone mechanical shock? Do such brand cards simply fail electrically after so few years? Or ...
Somehow it became invalid in the Android phone. no real idea why.? Problem with low voltage? phone mechanical shock? Do such brand cards simply fail electrically after so few years? Or ...