Bummer... that didn't work:

$ sudo ntfsck /dev/sdc
Boot sector: Bad jump.
Boot sector: Bad NTFS magic.
sectors_per_cluster (216) is not a power of 2.
Attribute (0xbd58c437) is larger than FILE record at offset 21297264072
(0x4f56a75c8).
Loading $MFT runlist failed. Trying $MFTMirr.
Failed to read file record at offset -6121729999247507456
(0xab0b3f0000000000).
Loading $MFTMirr runlist failed too. Aborting.
NTFS signature is missing.

So should I just format it as FAT?

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Matt Graham <mhgraham@crow202.org> wrote:

> On 2017-01-01 16:34, Michael wrote:
>
>> $ sudo fsck.ntfs /dev/sdc
>> sudo: fsck.ntfs: command not found
>> $ sudo fsck.vfat /dev/sdc
>> fsck.fat 3.0.26 (2014-03-07)
>> Currently, only 1 or 2 FATs are supported, not 251.
>>
>
> Provided that you have ntfs-3g installed, the fsck for ntfs is called
> ntfsck instead of fsck.ntfs .  No, I don't know why there isn't a symlink
> from fsck.ntfs to ntfsck.  And yes, running fsck.vfat on an NTFS partition
> will give you some wonky error messages.
>
>
> --
> Crow202 Blog: http://crow202.org/wordpress
> There is no Darkness in Eternity
> But only Light too dim for us to see.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>



-- 
:-)~MIKE~(-: