From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jul 21 08:09:35 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA17771 for current-outgoing; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 08:09:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tau-ceti.isc-br.com (root@tau-ceti.isc-br.com [129.189.2.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA17764 for ; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 08:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by tau-ceti.isc-br.com via rmail with stdio id for freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 08:09:15 -0700 (PDT) (Smail-3.2.0.93 1997-Apr-12 #12 built 1997-May-25) Received: from phobos.walker.dom (localhost.walker.dom [127.0.0.1]) by phobos.walker.dom (8.8.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA16933; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 07:08:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199707211408.HAA16933@phobos.walker.dom> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96 To: Terry Lambert cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Insertion of NUL's (was: Re: -current :) In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 20 Jul 1997 17:10:42 PDT." <199707210010.RAA10173@phaeton.artisoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 07:08:02 -0700 From: Keith Walker Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > [ ... NUL insertion ... ] > > > Oh good grief, I retired my only QIC-02 tape drive because I thought it was screwed up and inserting NUL's. Tapes made with tar (and I think dump, but I can't remember for sure) would have blocks of ^@'s inserted every once in a while, certainly enough to render a tape backup useless. > > > > Could this be related to the above problem? Or is my tape drive (circa 1987) actually broke? (Being's how the tape drive is so old, I don't have any DOS utilities to check the thing :-) > > I think the tape is probably toast. It's unlikely to interact this > way, since it doesn't deal with the idea of partial pages. I believe > the problem is with backing store for the FS, not devices (I could > be wrong; when did it start behaving badly? Is it consistent? If > so, try running it under an older -- 2.2 or earlier -- kernel to see). > It started all of this under 2.2. I'm sure that the tape drive is probably screwed up; sure enough that I'm not gonna drag it out and hook it up. Its just that the symptoms seemed so similar, that just for a moment there I had hope that it might not be the drive :-/ The beast only held about 60 Meg anyway. Kinda impractical in these days of cheap 4GB drives. (Of course, that was an awesome amount back in 1987 :-)