Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 22:29:35 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson <robert@cyrus.watson.org> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: alk@pobox.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: wd0s1e hard errors Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980205222631.20242B-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <199802060033.LAA01638@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 6 Feb 1998, Mike Smith wrote: > > Should bad144 be retired? > > I get the distinct feeling that the time has prettymuch come for this, > yes. It's only real use is for old 'wd' disks, most of whom are dead > and gone. > > Killing it from the boot floppy in particular would win us some more > space. Hey! :) My Kerberos server is running quite happily on a hard disk that I have had for the last 9 or 10 years. Great drive -- all of my Maxtors have lasted really well. It has one or two bad sectors, but has had those for at least 4 years. I keep backups of important data, but have had no problems. Bad144 on a boot-floppy for install seems quite necessary to me. If we do retire it from a boot floppy, maybe we should have an "old install floppy" that supports bad144, etc, but skips out on PCI support, for example. It may be a more fair assumption that PCI-based machines won't need bad144, but my old 386 does. :) As to why I kept the machine? A Kerberos server just does a little DES, and why fix something that is clearly not broken? Robert N Watson Carnegie Mellon University http://www.cmu.edu/ SafePort Network Services http://www.safeport.com/ robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980205222631.20242B-100000>