Andreas Janssen wrote:
...
It is not a configuration problem. Support for LBA48 (which allows more
than 137 GB the way the manufacturers count, 128 GB otherwise)...
By the way, the manufacturers use the standard set of S.I. prefixes
(in which G corresponds to 10).
If you want to talk about
Thanks for everyone's input. I had something come up at work, so have
been busy with other things. I have just upgraded to 2.4.26 and will
do some testing. Until then. THANKS!
Andreas Janssen wrote:
Hello
Gayle Lee Fairless (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
I'm using a Wester
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Marco Paganini wrote:
> Hi Gayle,
>
> > I did not run into the 128 GB limitation because I partitioned the drive
> > into 6 partitions, none bigger than 40 GB. My smallest partition is 2 GB
> > as permitted by the Western Digital Data Lifeguard utility available off
> > t
Hi Gayle,
> I did not run into the 128 GB limitation because I partitioned the drive
> into 6 partitions, none bigger than 40 GB. My smallest partition is 2 GB
> as permitted by the Western Digital Data Lifeguard utility available off
> their website. I got it because I was aware of the 64 GB
Marco Paganini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've seen strange problems with big hard drives and 2.4.18. Actually, I lost
> an entire hard-drive because I partitioned and created the fs under knoppix
> (2.4.22), but was using the system under stable (2.4.18). It seems like,
> somehow, 2.4.18 will
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Gayle Lee Fairless wrote:
>
> > My master drive is on the end of the cable, but that is not the WD drive.
> > When installing, the ribbon was clearly marked on the connectors for
> > master and slave. This is a Gateway 500 run
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Gayle Lee Fairless wrote:
> My master drive is on the end of the cable, but that is not the WD drive.
> When installing, the ribbon was clearly marked on the connectors for
> master and slave. This is a Gateway 500 running a Pentium III at 500 MHZ.
> The other drives a
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Gayle Lee Fairless wrote:
>
> > > a. Drive is master, no slave
>
> that requires a jumper change on the disk -- or --
> the disk is on the master connector of the ide cable
>
> "cable select" might be an issue as you noted
>
> >
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Andreas Janssen wrote:
> Hello
>
> Gayle Lee Fairless (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> > I'm using a Western Digital 160GB drive as a slave. The master is
> > an IBM 14 GB that holds Windnows 98SE. I put Debian GNU/Linux woody
> > 2.4.18 on the WD drive.
>
> And th
Hello
Marco Paganini (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>> This is almost certainly a kernel problem. However, it is quite
>> likely that different distros have their kernels configured
>> differently.
>
> I've seen strange problems with big hard drives and 2.4.18. Actually,
> I lost an entire hard-
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Gayle Lee Fairless wrote:
> > a. Drive is master, no slave
that requires a jumper change on the disk -- or --
the disk is on the master connector of the ide cable
"cable select" might be an issue as you noted
> > b. Drive is master, slave present
keeps wd disks happpy,
Marco Paganini schrieb:
This is almost certainly a kernel problem. However, it is quite likely
that different distros have their kernels configured differently.
I've seen strange problems with big hard drives and 2.4.18. Actually, I lost
an entire hard-drive because I partitioned and created th
Hello
Gayle Lee Fairless (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> I'm using a Western Digital 160GB drive as a slave. The master is
> an IBM 14 GB that holds Windnows 98SE. I put Debian GNU/Linux woody
> 2.4.18 on the WD drive.
And that works? As far as I know 2.4.18 does not support LBA48, which
m
> This is almost certainly a kernel problem. However, it is quite likely
> that different distros have their kernels configured differently.
I've seen strange problems with big hard drives and 2.4.18. Actually, I lost
an entire hard-drive because I partitioned and created the fs under knoppix
(
This just sounds weird to me. Managing disks and filesystems is done in
the kernel; there is very little a *distribution* can do to screw up
access at this level.
This is almost certainly a kernel problem. However, it is quite likely that
different distros have their kernels configured differentl
On Tue, 2004-06-22 at 12:45, Greg Madden wrote:
> On Monday 21 June 2004 03:21 pm, Ryan Nielsen wrote:
> > I would like to use a couple of 250GB Western Digitals to backup
> > data. I set up a Debian machine (I have 4 others for other purposes),
> > to use as a backup server. I am having difficult
John Summerfield wrote:
Ryan Nielsen wrote:
I would like to use a couple of 250GB Western Digitals to backup
data. I set up a Debian machine (I have 4 others for other
purposes), to use as a backup server. I am having difficulties with
the drives. I tried two Maxtors previous and have swappe
Ryan Nielsen wrote:
I would like to use a couple of 250GB Western Digitals to backup
data. I set up a Debian machine (I have 4 others for other purposes),
to use as a backup server. I am having difficulties with the drives.
I tried two Maxtors previous and have swapped them out thinking it wa
On Monday 21 June 2004 03:21 pm, Ryan Nielsen wrote:
> I would like to use a couple of 250GB Western Digitals to backup
> data. I set up a Debian machine (I have 4 others for other purposes),
> to use as a backup server. I am having difficulties with the drives.
> I tried two Maxtors previous and
19 matches
Mail list logo
