Matthias Apitz wrote:
to end this threat, I did:
# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da0 bs=64k count=1
# newfs_msdos /dev/da0
# mount -t msdosfs /dev/da0 /mnt
# time cat file file file > /mnt/big
cat: stdout: File too large
0.276u 19.421s 14:36.63 2.2%11+1180k 33887+65536io 0pf+0w
# df -kh /mnt
Fil
On March 5, 2009, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Thursday, March 05, 2009 a las 10:48:52AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar > to
end this threat, I did:
>
> # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da0 bs=64k count=1
> # newfs_msdos /dev/da0
> # mount -t msdosfs /dev/da0 /mnt
> # time cat file file file > /mnt/big
> cat:
El día Thursday, March 05, 2009 a las 03:26:12PM +0100, Paul B. Mahol escribió:
> On 3/5/09, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> > El dia Thursday, March 05, 2009 a las 10:48:52AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar
> > escribio:
> >
> >> >>formatted properly?
> >> >
> >> >I did a 'ls -l /dev/da*' after key insert and th
On 3/5/09, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El dia Thursday, March 05, 2009 a las 10:48:52AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar
> escribio:
>
>> >>formatted properly?
>> >
>> >I did a 'ls -l /dev/da*' after key insert and there was only /dev/da0;
>> >maybe I should do
>> >
>> ># newfs_msdos /dev/da0
>> >
>> >???
>>
>>
El día Thursday, March 05, 2009 a las 10:48:52AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar
escribió:
> >>formatted properly?
> >
> >I did a 'ls -l /dev/da*' after key insert and there was only /dev/da0;
> >maybe I should do
> >
> ># newfs_msdos /dev/da0
> >
> >???
>
> to be sure do
>
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da0
formatted properly?
I did a 'ls -l /dev/da*' after key insert and there was only /dev/da0;
maybe I should do
# newfs_msdos /dev/da0
???
to be sure do
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/da0 bs=64k count=1
before to clean anything from beginning, if any mess is there.
__
formatted properly?
I did a 'ls -l /dev/da*' after key insert and there was only /dev/da0;
maybe I should do
# newfs_msdos /dev/da0
yes. anyway - windoze at least XP no more needs partitions on such
devices.
???
Thx
matthias
--
Matthias Apitz
Manager Technical Support - OCLC Gm
El día Thursday, March 05, 2009 a las 01:09:27AM -0800, Charles Oppermann
escribió:
>
> > > 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0 Mar 5
> > > 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0: Removable
> > > Direct Access SCSI-2 device Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0:
> > > 40.000
> > 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0 Mar 5
> > 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0: Removable
> > Direct Access SCSI-2 device Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0:
> > 40.000MB/s transfers
> > Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0: 7712MB (15794176 512 byte sectors:
> >
Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: umass0: on uhub4
Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0 at umass-sim0 bus 0 target 0 lun 0
Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0: Removable
Direct Access SCSI-2 device
Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers
Mar 5 08:48:33 rebelion kernel: da0:
Hello,
I've just bought a new USB key. The label claims "8 GByte" which is the
first lying; it shows up as only ~7.5 GByte in /var/log/messages, but
there seems to be another bigger problem:
Mar 5 08:48:32 rebelion root: Unknown USB device: vendor 0x1307 product 0x0165
bus uhub4
Mar 5 08:48:3
11 matches
Mail list logo
