On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 01:49:16PM +0100, Fergus Daly wrote:
> I've got a IDE Iomega 100MB drive on machine A and a IDE Iomega 250MB
> drive on machine B.
> 
> A 100 MB disk inserted into either drive is recognised without any evident
> problems (as hdb4) at startup, mounted, read from and written to, without
> any problems. Including the switch -t vfat in the mount command has the
> consequence of preserving long filenames, otherwise the default is 8.3.
> 
> A 250 MB disk inserted into machine B results in the message
> 
>   "The drive reports both 250609664 and 25060384 bytes as its capacity"
> 
> but otherwise everything seems to work just fine as described above for
> the 100MB disk. I observe that much has been written about this and people
> seem to be bothered more by the inconvenience of the message than by
> anxieties about any real physical ambiguities it might imply. I shall
> assume that reading from and writing to a 250MB disk are, as they appear
> to be, failsafe operations (as far as anything is).
> 
> Unlike writing to a NTFS file system, for instance.
> 
> Any comments?

I suspect this is what you are seeing: the partition table entry for any
one partition stores the partition information in two different places, in
two different ways. So I think your ZIP disk has one or possibly two
incorrect entries. The mount software is written to examine both places
and report any discrepancy. This is probably a good idea, even if it is
annoying, because if the discrepancy were large it could indicate a corrupt
partition table, with all that implies. If you correctly copied the second
value in the error message, then you do have a serious discrepancy.

Try deleting the existing partition with fdisk, then building a new
one. Make a file system on it. See if you still get the error message.

If you do not see the error message you might want to let Iomega know they
have a problem.

-- 

                -- C^2

No windows were crashed in the making of this email.

Looking for fine software and/or web pages?
http://w3.trib.com/~ccurley

PGP signature

Reply via email to