Kai Makisara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > v2.6 also contains the same problem BTW. > > > > Try this: > > > > --- a/drivers/scsi/st.c.orig 2005-03-02 09:02:13.637158144 -0300 > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/st.c 2005-03-02 09:02:20.208159200 -0300 > > @@ -3778,7 +3778,6 @@ > > read: st_read, > > write: st_write, > > ioctl: st_ioctl, > > - llseek: no_llseek, > > open: st_open, > > flush: st_flush, > > release: st_release, > > This change covers up the problem. The real bug is in tar.
In that case we're kinda screwed, and should change the kernel to make tar work again. We can send a bug report to the tar folks (good luck) and wait a few years. > The first BSF did position the tape correctly although it did fail. (what's a BSF?) If it positioned the tape successfully, why did it claim that it failed? If we were to fix that up, would tar then be happy? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
