Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 11:41:10 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: peter@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Cc: wilko@yedi.iaf.nl, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: On ESDI install. Message-ID: <9508241741.AA08205@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199508241304.IAA19423@bonkers.taronga.com> from "Peter da Silva" at Aug 24, 95 08:04:56 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Since bad144 was broken for drives over 1024 cylinders, I had to > reformat a couple of times to get it down to 1 bad sector per track and > use sector sparing. That left a couple of bad sectors on wd1, took care > of them by creating a bunch of files until I had a file with the bad > block in it. Yeah, I think the relocation of the bad block replacements to the end of the partition is a bad thing. It should either go before the 'a' slice (limiting its size) or after the 'a' slice (pushing out what "might work" to get the kernel under 1024). > Xenix did all their bad blocks that way. Created a .badblock file in the > partition root and filled it with bad blocks. Was a lot more convenient than > bad144... I think the idea of "perfect media" and "file system independent block replacement" is bad. If I had my druthers, I'd probably bring back the bad block list on inode 1 instead. Consider a mounted DOS partition with bad blocks on it. What do you do when you find one under BSD? Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9508241741.AA08205>