On 2/25/25 19:47, David Wright wrote:
On Sun 23 Feb 2025 at 09:47:41 (-0500), gene heskett wrote:
On 2/23/25 00:00, David Wright wrote:
On Sat 22 Feb 2025 at 07:29:15 (-0500), gene heskett wrote:
[ … ]
read all that in the drive label. There was a time when seagate made
good hard drives. One
On Sun 23 Feb 2025 at 09:47:41 (-0500), gene heskett wrote:
> On 2/23/25 00:00, David Wright wrote:
> > On Sat 22 Feb 2025 at 07:29:15 (-0500), gene heskett wrote:
> > [ … ]
> > > read all that in the drive label. There was a time when seagate made
> > > good hard drives. One of my cnc'd machines h
On 2/23/25 00:00, David Wright wrote:
On Sat 22 Feb 2025 at 07:29:15 (-0500), gene heskett wrote:
[ … ]
read all that in the drive label. There was a time when seagate made
good hard drives. One of my cnc'd machines has a 250G in it, shut off
only for new installs, still running wheezy. No rea
On Sat 22 Feb 2025 at 07:29:15 (-0500), gene heskett wrote:
[ … ]
> read all that in the drive label. There was a time when seagate made
> good hard drives. One of my cnc'd machines has a 250G in it, shut off
> only for new installs, still running wheezy. No reallocated sectors,
> the last time I l
On 2/22/25 11:24, Dan Purgert wrote:
On Feb 22, 2025, gene heskett wrote:
On 2/21/25 11:42, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That was 2+ years ago, and 2T's were brand new.
With a lot of emphasis on the "+" I guess, since I bought my first 2½"
2TB HDD in 2012.
Stefan
I was shopping in the
I've been buying Seagate 4TB EXOS SAS 'wiped' drives on ebay in box lots
of ten for $150 to $200. That's $15-$20 for a 4TB drive. The one box had
2 DOA drives, the rest are performing great. I have a dozen of these
running in a Dell R720XD Rack server (RAID controller reflashed; can't
think of
On Feb 22, 2025, gene heskett wrote:
> On 2/21/25 11:42, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > > > That was 2+ years ago, and 2T's were brand new.
> > With a lot of emphasis on the "+" I guess, since I bought my first 2½"
> > 2TB HDD in 2012.
> >
> >
> > Stefan
> I was shopping in the 3.5" drives at
On 2/21/25 11:42, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That was 2+ years ago, and 2T's were brand new.
With a lot of emphasis on the "+" I guess, since I bought my first 2½"
2TB HDD in 2012.
Stefan
I was shopping in the 3.5" drives at newegg IIRC, 2T was the biggest,
and my 3rd woof died in 2020, a
On 2/21/25 18:42, Andy Smith wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 10:11:59AM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
What would I do with 2 more identical drives doomed to go away as soon as
the helium leaves?
The magnets could augment a tin foil hat up to a whole new level of
safety; may even make the use o
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 10:11:59AM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> What would I do with 2 more identical drives doomed to go away as soon as
> the helium leaves?
The magnets could augment a tin foil hat up to a whole new level of
safety; may even make the use of red SATA cables viable.
Thanks,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 11:19:11AM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>
> On 2/21/25 11:03, Henning Follmann wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 09:29:32AM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
> > > On 2/21/25 07:11, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > > > On Feb 21, 2025, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:
>> That was 2+ years ago, and 2T's were brand new.
With a lot of emphasis on the "+" I guess, since I bought my first 2½"
2TB HDD in 2012.
Stefan
On 2/21/25 11:03, Henning Follmann wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 09:29:32AM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
On 2/21/25 07:11, Dan Purgert wrote:
On Feb 21, 2025, Frank Guthausen wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:07:10 -0500
gene heskett wrote:
[...]
So are spinning rust when it only lasts 2 weeks
On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 09:29:32AM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>
> On 2/21/25 07:11, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > On Feb 21, 2025, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:07:10 -0500
> > > gene heskett wrote:
[...]
>
> So are spinning rust when it only lasts 2 weeks. Seacrate has sold me t
On 2/21/25 09:48, Dan Purgert wrote:
On Feb 21, 2025, gene heskett wrote:
On 2/21/25 07:11, Dan Purgert wrote:
On Feb 21, 2025, Frank Guthausen wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:07:10 -0500
gene heskett wrote:
my home net, is behind dd-wrt, in plain text. on an address block
that does not get th
On 2/21/25 07:11, Dan Purgert wrote:
On Feb 21, 2025, Frank Guthausen wrote:
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:07:10 -0500
gene heskett wrote:
my home net, is behind dd-wrt, in plain text. on an address block
that does not get thru a router. And in 30 years I have not been
touched.
LUKS addresses a co
On Feb 21, 2025, gene heskett wrote:
>
> On 2/21/25 07:11, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > On Feb 21, 2025, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:07:10 -0500
> > > gene heskett wrote:
> > > > my home net, is behind dd-wrt, in plain text. on an address block
> > > > that does not get thru a r
On Feb 21, 2025, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:07:10 -0500
> gene heskett wrote:
> >
> > my home net, is behind dd-wrt, in plain text. on an address block
> > that does not get thru a router. And in 30 years I have not been
> > touched.
>
> LUKS addresses a completely different
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:07:10 -0500
gene heskett wrote:
>
> my home net, is behind dd-wrt, in plain text. on an address block
> that does not get thru a router. And in 30 years I have not been
> touched.
LUKS addresses a completely different attack vector than network
intrusion. As long as the L
On 2/21/25 01:09, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 02:48:21PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
On 2/20/25 14:10, Marco Möller wrote:
To my understanding, it makes no sense to perform a TRIM on storage
which is a LUKS2 encyrypted LVM. The storage device should anyway think
that each bit
On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 02:48:21PM -0500, gene heskett wrote:
>
> On 2/20/25 14:10, Marco Möller wrote:
> > To my understanding, it makes no sense to perform a TRIM on storage
> > which is a LUKS2 encyrypted LVM. The storage device should anyway think
> > that each bit is in use after it was fille
On 2/20/25 15:29, Marco Möller wrote:
On 2/20/25 20:48, gene heskett wrote:
On 2/20/25 14:10, Marco Möller wrote:
To my understanding, it makes no sense to perform a TRIM on storage
which is a LUKS2 encyrypted LVM. The storage device should anyway
think that each bit is in use after it was
On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:48:21 -0500
gene heskett wrote:
> Generally speaking, all file systems know exactly whats in use,
> they have to, otherwise they would randomly overwrite another file,
> The encryption is only for the data in that allocated space. The file
> system knows nothing about that
On 2/20/25 20:48, gene heskett wrote:
On 2/20/25 14:10, Marco Möller wrote:
To my understanding, it makes no sense to perform a TRIM on storage
which is a LUKS2 encyrypted LVM. The storage device should anyway
think that each bit is in use after it was filled with random data
when creating th
On 2/20/25 14:10, Marco Möller wrote:
To my understanding, it makes no sense to perform a TRIM on storage
which is a LUKS2 encyrypted LVM. The storage device should anyway
think that each bit is in use after it was filled with random data
when creating the space. Not only that I cannot imagin
To my understanding, it makes no sense to perform a TRIM on storage
which is a LUKS2 encyrypted LVM. The storage device should anyway think
that each bit is in use after it was filled with random data when
creating the space. Not only that I cannot imagine how the storage
device should Know wha
26 matches
Mail list logo
