On Friday 24 January 2003 15:19, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote: >On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 at 2:44pm, Gene Heskett wrote > >> speaking) drive. I'm noteing that Martins drive claimed it >> needed a 545 kilobyte filemark. That, to me with zero >> experience with either drive, still seems highly excessive. > >Well, given that tapetype reported a 5577 kbytes filemark for by > brand new AIT3 drive...
Duh! 5.5 megs for a filemark? Maybe, but thats a ridiculous amount of overhead IMO. I wonder if tapetype has a (heaven forbid) bug? -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.22% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
