Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Friday, July 29, 2011 02:41:20 PM Dale wrote:
I sort of gave up on this drive. I had a very kind soul to send me a
video card when I did this build. He also sent me a 250Gb drive. I
copied all I could to that but did lose a LOT of my videos and such.
Anyway, I'm
On Friday, July 29, 2011 02:41:20 PM Dale wrote:
> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > To check this, you could try creating a new file (with size = 0) on the
> > root of that drive, like (After you close and save all your work):
> >
> > touch/LetMeseeIfThisWorksOrIfTheKernelPanicsAgain
> >
> > If it does
Peter Humphrey wrote:
In fact it is so, by design. I don't know what I did, but after enough
reboots Win-XP was happy. Thanks anyway.
That sounds like winders. lol
Dale
:-) :-)
On Sunday 31 July 2011 18:20:02 Mick wrote:
> If the partition of the WinXP installation is intact then the position of
> the partition on the disk may be causing you trouble, in which case play
> around with the GRUB hide and chainload options to hide other
> disks/partitions, so that WinXP think
On Sunday 31 Jul 2011 01:53:39 Peter Humphrey wrote:
> All I have to do now is to persuade Win-XP to find the disk. No luck so
> far...
I don't know what's your partition topology, but you may want to use:
fixboot (to rewrite the partition boot record on the WinXP partition)
fixmbr (to rewrite t
On Sunday 31 July 2011 15:17:16 Joshua Murphy wrote:
> There probably is a fair chunk of difference in maximum speed the disk
> can work at on each end (I've even seen around a 20MB/s difference on
> several 160GB drives I've dealt with), but outside of some older
> drives that've been heavily abu
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Peter Humphrey
wrote:
> On Sunday 31 July 2011 14:15:20 Joshua Murphy wrote:
>
>> Well, GParted, if I recall, does a couple checks to guess 'best' block
>> size when cloning or moving a partition, but I'm really not sure how
>> it does things when shrinking and shi
On Sunday 31 July 2011 14:15:20 Joshua Murphy wrote:
> Well, GParted, if I recall, does a couple checks to guess 'best' block
> size when cloning or moving a partition, but I'm really not sure how
> it does things when shrinking and shifting it sideways to a spot that
> overlaps with where it star
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Mick wrote:
> On Sunday 31 Jul 2011 09:49:33 Dale wrote:
>> Mick wrote:
>> > On Sunday 31 Jul 2011 01:53:39 Peter Humphrey wrote:
>> >> I hope you're pleased to know the process finished. 23 hours to move a
>> >> partition! Never heard anything like it.
>> >
>> > N
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Peter Humphrey
wrote:
> On Saturday 30 July 2011 15:50:11 Dale wrote:
>> Peter Humphrey wrote:
>> > One thing's certain: it's a good test of the USB disk! I just hope your
>> > power incident doesn't happen to me too. :-)
>>
>> That would suck. I sure did hate t
On Sunday 31 Jul 2011 09:49:33 Dale wrote:
> Mick wrote:
> > On Sunday 31 Jul 2011 01:53:39 Peter Humphrey wrote:
> >> I hope you're pleased to know the process finished. 23 hours to move a
> >> partition! Never heard anything like it.
> >
> > Not unheard of. If you have too small/large bs and th
Mick wrote:
On Sunday 31 Jul 2011 01:53:39 Peter Humphrey wrote:
I hope you're pleased to know the process finished. 23 hours to move a
partition! Never heard anything like it.
Not unheard of. If you have too small/large bs and the disk is relatively
large it will take quite some ho
Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Saturday 30 July 2011 15:50:11 Dale wrote:
Peter Humphrey wrote:
One thing's certain: it's a good test of the USB disk! I just hope your
power incident doesn't happen to me too. :-)
That would suck. I sure did hate to lose my videos. I bet AT&T do
On Sunday 31 Jul 2011 01:53:39 Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I hope you're pleased to know the process finished. 23 hours to move a
> partition! Never heard anything like it.
Not unheard of. If you have too small/large bs and the disk is relatively
large it will take quite some hours to get it transf
On Saturday 30 July 2011 15:50:11 Dale wrote:
> Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > One thing's certain: it's a good test of the USB disk! I just hope your
> > power incident doesn't happen to me too. :-)
>
> That would suck. I sure did hate to lose my videos. I bet AT&T does to
> since I have to go fin
Peter Humphrey wrote:
One thing's certain: it's a good test of the USB disk! I just hope your
power incident doesn't happen to me too. :-)
That would suck. I sure did hate to lose my videos. I bet AT&T does to
since I have to go find them and download them again. :/
Dale
:-) :-)
Michael Mol wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Dale wrote:
196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032 100 100 000Old_age Always
- 0
197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000Old_age Always
- 0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0030 100 100 000
On Saturday 30 July 2011 00:06:57 Dale wrote:
> I'm just curious as to how much longer dd is going to take. I wish it
> has some sort of a progress bar or something. :/
I'm in a similar process. I have an external disk which I use to back my
boxes up. I need a bootable vfat partition for the W
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Dale wrote:
> 196 Reallocated_Event_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always
> - 0
> 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age Always
> - 0
> 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0030 100 100 000 Old_age Offlin
pk wrote:
On 2011-07-30 01:06, Dale wrote:
I'm just curious as to how much longer dd is going to take. I wish it
has some sort of a progress bar or something. :/
http://www.rootninja.com/dd-with-a-progress-bar/
(emerge sys-apps/pv)
Disclaimer: I haven't used this myself...
HTH
Michael Mol wrote:
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Peter Humphrey
wrote:
On Saturday 30 July 2011 11:17:52 Dale wrote:
What could have caused this? Could it be a file system problem? I
don't think it is a physical failure since it is working now after
giving it a fresh start. I
Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Saturday 30 July 2011 11:17:52 Dale wrote:
What could have caused this? Could it be a file system problem? I
don't think it is a physical failure since it is working now after
giving it a fresh start. I just don't get how this could have caused a
kernel panic. T
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Peter Humphrey
wrote:
> On Saturday 30 July 2011 11:17:52 Dale wrote:
>
>> What could have caused this? Could it be a file system problem? I
>> don't think it is a physical failure since it is working now after
>> giving it a fresh start. I just don't get how th
On Saturday 30 July 2011 11:17:52 Dale wrote:
> What could have caused this? Could it be a file system problem? I
> don't think it is a physical failure since it is working now after
> giving it a fresh start. I just don't get how this could have caused a
> kernel panic. This is plain weird.
On 2011-07-30 01:06, Dale wrote:
> I'm just curious as to how much longer dd is going to take. I wish it
> has some sort of a progress bar or something. :/
http://www.rootninja.com/dd-with-a-progress-bar/
(emerge sys-apps/pv)
Disclaimer: I haven't used this myself...
HTH
Best regards
Peter
Mick wrote:
On Saturday 30 Jul 2011 01:32:07 Dale wrote:
Alex Schuster wrote:
Am 30.07.2011 01:06, schrieb Dale:
I'm just curious as to how much longer dd is going to take. I wish it
has some sort of a progress bar or something. :/
dcfldd has a progress indicator
On Saturday 30 Jul 2011 01:32:07 Dale wrote:
> Alex Schuster wrote:
> > Am 30.07.2011 01:06, schrieb Dale:
> >> I'm just curious as to how much longer dd is going to take. I wish it
> >> has some sort of a progress bar or something. :/
dcfldd has a progress indicator AFAIR.
To make sure that yo
Alex Schuster wrote:
Am 30.07.2011 01:06, schrieb Dale:
I'm just curious as to how much longer dd is going to take. I wish it
has some sort of a progress bar or something. :/
Find the PID of the dd process with ps ax | grep [d]d or somethhing,
then kill -USR1. This will dd output h
Am 30.07.2011 01:06, schrieb Dale:
> Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Dale wrote:
>>> While I am at it, what is the best file system for videos? That is the
>>> biggest thing I use that drive for. I had a LOT of NCIS, CSI and other
>>> shows that are now gone. Anyway, wha
Michael Mol wrote:
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Dale wrote:
It worked fine and it was there with 0 bytes. Weird.
I sort of gave up on this drive. I had a very kind soul to send me a video
card when I did this build. He also sent me a 250Gb drive. I copied all I
could to that but di
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Dale wrote:
> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
>>
>> On Thursday 28 July 2011 18:37:24 Dale wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my drives
>>> file system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are called? That may
>>> explain why I
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday 28 July 2011 18:37:24 Dale wrote:
Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my drives
file system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are called? That may
explain why I can't copy anything to it but it works fine as far as
reading goe
On Thursday 28 July 2011 18:37:24 Dale wrote:
> Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my drives
> file system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are called? That may
> explain why I can't copy anything to it but it works fine as far as
> reading goes.
>
> Thoughts? How
Adam Carter wrote:
Dale, usually you'd check this by running mount without arguments, and
looking to see if the options have ro or rw listed;
Sorry - didnt read your post correctly. Obviously you already know this.
Doesn't hurt to mention things sometimes. There are things I don't
> Dale, usually you'd check this by running mount without arguments, and
> looking to see if the options have ro or rw listed;
Sorry - didnt read your post correctly. Obviously you already know this.
>> 1) Is the filesystem mounted read-only?
Dale, usually you'd check this by running mount without arguments, and
looking to see if the options have ro or rw listed;
eg
adam@rix ~ $ mount
rootfs on / type rootfs (rw)
/dev/root on / type reiserfs (rw,noatime)
none on /proc type proc (rw,relatime)
Willie Wong wrote:
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 06:37:24PM -0500, Dale wrote:
Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my
drives file system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are
called?
That usually won't throw a kernel panic. That usually just gives an
error.
W
Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Dale wrote:
Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my drives file
system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are called? That may explain
why I can't copy anything to it but it works fine as far as reading goes.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Dale wrote:
>
> Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my drives file
> system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are called? That may explain
> why I can't copy anything to it but it works fine as far as reading goes.
>
> Thoughts? How
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 06:37:24PM -0500, Dale wrote:
>
> Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my
> drives file system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are
> called?
That usually won't throw a kernel panic. That usually just gives an
error.
W
--
Willie W. Wong
Pardon me. My brain passed gas here. lol Could it be that my drives
file system has ran out of inodes or whatever they are called? That may
explain why I can't copy anything to it but it works fine as far as
reading goes.
Thoughts? How do I check/change it? Headed to some man pages too
Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 17:18:19 James Wall wrote:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Dale wrote:
Here is a update. Let's see what folks think about this situation. I
mentioned in another thread that I did a from scratch kernel. It was a
.35 version. It see
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 17:18:19 James Wall wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Dale wrote:
> > Here is a update. Let's see what folks think about this situation. I
> > mentioned in another thread that I did a from scratch kernel. It was a
> > .35 version. It seemed to work fine, for a
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Dale wrote:
>
> Here is a update. Let's see what folks think about this situation. I
> mentioned in another thread that I did a from scratch kernel. It was a .35
> version. It seemed to work fine, for a while. When I tell Seamonkey to
> download to my desktop,
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 22:03:31 Dale wrote:
> Does this make sense to anyone?
Yes. I think your power interruption has damaged the drive electronics.
--
Rgds
Peter Linux Counter number 5290
Todd Goodman wrote:
It's certainly possible it's unrelated. Or it could be something
similar and the other bug reporter made a mistake bisecting or didn't run
long enough to fail with that bisection. It's possibly a lot of things
since we don't have enough information.
I don't think that woul
* Dale [110726 09:46]:
> Todd Goodman wrote:
> >
> > I'll let you know if I see anything that looks related. It would be
> > interesting if going back to 2.6.38 is a temp fix for you. I know you'd
> > tried older kernels before but...
> > Todd
> >
> >
>
> This makes me wonder. I have went
Todd Goodman wrote:
I'll let you know if I see anything that looks related. It would be
interesting if going back to 2.6.38 is a temp fix for you. I know you'd
tried older kernels before but...
Todd
This makes me wonder. I have went all the way back to 2.6.35-r15 and it
does the same
* Dale [110725 15:33]:
> Todd Goodman wrote:
> > * Dale [110725 14:43]:
> >
> >> Todd Goodman wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dale (and whoever else was having problems with Firefox and X hangs,)
> >>>
> >>> I don't know if you've seen it but:
> >>>
> >>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/24/54
> >>>
> >>>
Todd Goodman wrote:
* Dale [110725 14:43]:
Todd Goodman wrote:
Dale (and whoever else was having problems with Firefox and X hangs,)
I don't know if you've seen it but:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/24/54
looks like a thread that might be applicable?
Todd
That does look
* Dale [110725 14:43]:
> Todd Goodman wrote:
> > Dale (and whoever else was having problems with Firefox and X hangs,)
> >
> > I don't know if you've seen it but:
> >
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/24/54
> >
> > looks like a thread that might be applicable?
> >
> > Todd
> >
> >
> >
>
> That
Todd Goodman wrote:
Dale (and whoever else was having problems with Firefox and X hangs,)
I don't know if you've seen it but:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/24/54
looks like a thread that might be applicable?
Todd
That does look interesting. I had a few times where mine would just
hang
Dale (and whoever else was having problems with Firefox and X hangs,)
I don't know if you've seen it but:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/7/24/54
looks like a thread that might be applicable?
Todd
53 matches
Mail list logo
