cgsecurity.org

Stephen,

mounting with the -t ext4 option did the trick! Why ever...
Everything is visible and accessible!

I still don't know what has happened, but I am currently copying / backing up everything and will setup a completely new system on newest firmware afterwards.

Really appreciating your ...

Stephen,
thanks - now mounting failed with

[/] # mount /dev/md0 /share/MD0_DATA
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/md0,
missing codepage or other error
In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try
dmesg | tail or so

[/] #


dmesg gave me
[/] # dmesg | tail ...

Hi Stephen,

I don't hope it is related to the name ;-) Good for me, but it was another Bernd that you've made happy!
For me, it is the first time it happened, and I will for sure setup a working backup routine immediately!!

However, this may be only a short step (hopefully) from now, but mounting ...

Stephen,
thanks for your fast reply!

Here are the results:

1. for /proc/mdstat
~] # cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [multipath]
md13 : active raid1 sdb4[0] sdc4[3] sda4[2] sdd4[1]
458880 blocks [4/4] [UUUU]
bitmap: 0/57 pages [0KB ...

Stephen,
thanks a lot for this crash course in Unix - it's been a while that I was actively coding - and never at this level!
I have copied the output of the examination here. Seems mdadm is able to find something!

As you suggested, I will now try to find a hex editor and see if I can search for ...

Hi, apologizing for my stupidity, but I ran into a problem here:
as partition 3 of any of my drives is not marked anymore as a valid partition (testdisk output)

Current partition structure:
1 P MS Data 40 1060289 1060250 [primary]
No FAT, NTFS, ext2, JFS, Reiser, cramfs or XFS marker
2 P MS Data ...

Thanks for your input!
I will for sure try it: have reserved the weekend for recovery activities. I will let you know if it worked.

Note the mdadm 0.90 superblock is at the end of the partition. You can see it with a hex editor.
Is the superblock somehow marked that I can identify it using the ...

Thanks again, I will give it a try then!
Bernd

Hi Fiona,

thanks for all those details. It is a little of a catch 22 that QNAP very likely needs some info hidden on the harddisks to setup a (the) RAID, and testdisk needs the RAID to proceed...

Hope that I will receive some usable info from QNAP soon.

Thanks
Bernd

Fiona, just one short question for my clarification:

the log shows this entry, which also was part of the search for superblocks:

block_group_nr 1

recover_EXT2: "e2fsck -b 32768 -B 4096 device" may be needed
recover_EXT2: s_block_group_nr=1/67032, s_mnt_count=22/4294967295, s_blocks_per_group ...