Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:36:29 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.0 SCSI Tape Driver Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911160735130.98613-100000@beppo.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <19991115233605.10530@mojave.sitaranetworks.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > Sorry, no. When you write a tape with these devices there's always a > > leading erased area. That's why if you overwrite the front a tape you > > can't skip past this area to recover data you really need. A misfeature of > > modern technology. > > Is this anchored in the standards? What about DLT? What about future > drives? I certainly wouldn't rely on anything that isn't guaranteed > to stay that way. What happens if I write a tape on FreeBSD and read > it in on System V? The whole point of what I'm trying to is to conform to other systems. I wouldn't do it if it added to interoperability problems. > > >> In your other message you talk about the driver getting 2 residuals > >> in a row, well, unless you write the 2 EOF's you won't always get that... > >> depends on if the tape drive does it automagically (which many newer > >> drives do, they write 2 eof's and backspace over 1 of them for you when > >> ever you tell them to write EOF, the drive itself uses 2 EOF's to > >> determine logical EOT :-)). > > > > I repeat what I said in other mail- can you actually show me a tape drive > > where what I propose really doesn't work? > > I think this question is the wrong way round. Apparently. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9911160735130.98613-100000>