Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 14:08:16 -0400 From: David Banning <david+dated+1178561300.8c0419@skytracker.ca> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: can't zip large files 2gb > Message-ID: <20070502180815.GA50145@skytracker.ca> In-Reply-To: <20070502171723.GA1615@kobe.laptop> References: <20070501195825.GA10269@skytracker.ca> <20070502093757.GA2835@kobe.laptop> <20070502162657.GA21779@skytracker.ca> <20070502171723.GA1615@kobe.laptop>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > originally my problem was with a dedicated ide (on ide cable in machine) > > secondary mounted drive - 300G > > > > I tried it in /usr with same results. > > The disk type isn't really what I asked about. Is your /usr file system > mounted from UFS (I haven't kept all the messages of the thread, so I > don't remember from the df output; please excuse my short memory, if > I'm repeating a question already answered). I was actually stabbing at the answer there - yes, both file systems tried are UFS, each are on separate drives, both have plenty of space and I have done an error free fsck on one of those drives, the other is mounted and running so I have not tried fsck. Here is a summary; original 3G tar file; untars fine gzip; corrupts bzip2; currupts compress; corrupts rzip; corrupts I realize this looks like it may be memory, but running "top" I notice that archivers use very little memory, between 1-10 meg while running, while they do keep the processor fairly busy working. There is one thing on my mind - I only have 512Meg in my machine. I installed another 512M to make it 1G and the machine crashed once per week; "the new memory card" is what I concluded was a problem. I took out the memory card concluding that is was the the "new" memory I installed and then deinstalled that was problematic. Just so were clear - all of my zip problems have been been running on my original, problem free 512M memory. Now I'm thinking of another possiblity - could it be that installing the -new- memory caused the machine to reorganize how the -old- memory was used - exposing a problem in the original memory that before the machine didn't use that often? Hope you followed that -
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070502180815.GA50145>