ssharkey@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Scott A Sharkey) (02/17/91)
I just put up PH 1.5 (is it 1.5.10??), and I think the badblocks program is still screwed up when it comes to bad blocks greater than 8K. Any, I remember reading about problems with this a while ago, and used de to take a look after running readall and badblocks. It doesn;t look like the zone bitmaps are right to me. Does anyone have a version that they KNOW works? Can you send me a copy? Thanks. -Scott -- Scott Sharkey A Guest of The Ohio State University LANshark Systems 3000 Stone Mountain Dr. ssharkey@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu Pickerington, Ohio 43147
kjh@pollux.usc.edu (Kenneth J. Hendrickson) (02/17/91)
In article <1991Feb16.190126.10955@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu> ssharkey@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Scott A Sharkey) writes: >I just put up PH 1.5 (is it 1.5.10??), and I think the badblocks program >is still screwed up when it comes to bad blocks greater than 8K. I just used badblocks on a 48k partition. It worked flawlessly. I checked. However, for block numbers greater than 32767, badblocks reported a negative block number during the verification stage. I didn't look at the code, but I'd bet that signed integers were used where unsigned integers would have been more appropriate. I'm using Minix 1.5.10. -- favourite oxymorons: student athlete, military justice, mercy killing Ken Hendrickson N8DGN/6 kjh@usc.edu ...!uunet!usc!pollux!kjh