Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (2912 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [SLE] problems with Iomega Zip drives in Suse 9.2
- From: Doug B <suse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:02:13 -0600
- Message-id: <200502010902.13358.suse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Tuesday 01 February 2005 04:56 am, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> > When I first started looking for an answer, I found the suggestion
> > to create the /dev/hdx4. They put a script in boot.local to do
> > this every boot. It didn't work for me
>
> It wasn't created, or if created did not work?
>
> Did anybody try setting the sticky bit?
As I remember (I'm bad at making notes), it was created but I still
couldn't mount the disk. No one had suggested the sticky bit and I
didn't try it.
> > Some reformatted the disks with linux filesystems and mounted at
> > hdx1.
>
> I do that with some disks, but not all of them, I use zips for
> interchange. But I'm still using 9.1, and from the parallell port, I
> can't duplicate your problem.
I have only seen a couple of post about problems with 9.1 and zip
drives. I don't think those were related the hdx4 issue. I think that
appeared with 9.2.
> > I played around with mounting at partition 4 (as in all other
> > distros/releases I've used) then tried 1, 2, and 3 with no luck. I
> > don't know why I tried hdx with (no partition) but it worked!
>
> Funny. The other partitions will not work, unless formatted that way.
> But yes, I remember the issue being comented here, on list.
I knew it had always mounted at hdx4, but I was tired and ready to try
anything! That was easy to try and I've been surprised before when
something worked in an unexpected way. Since mounting at /dev/hdx I
have had no problems. I can read/write and even export through nfs so
other machines can use it.
> > I haven't had the time or desire to find out why this is. I
> > probably wouldn't understand it anyway.
>
> I understand. But, did you report to feedback? They really should
> know about this problem.
No I haven't. I just figured this was the 'new' and 'undocumented' to
mount a zip.
In another email in this thread you said:
"However, I think that the reason the device file is deleted every boot,
as some seem to report, should be worth investigating."
I truly can't say from personal experience that the device gets deleted.
The suggestion I read said to put the script in boot.local so the
device gets created on each boot. I just assumed it was deleted
everytime and had to be recreated.
Doug
> > When I first started looking for an answer, I found the suggestion
> > to create the /dev/hdx4. They put a script in boot.local to do
> > this every boot. It didn't work for me
>
> It wasn't created, or if created did not work?
>
> Did anybody try setting the sticky bit?
As I remember (I'm bad at making notes), it was created but I still
couldn't mount the disk. No one had suggested the sticky bit and I
didn't try it.
> > Some reformatted the disks with linux filesystems and mounted at
> > hdx1.
>
> I do that with some disks, but not all of them, I use zips for
> interchange. But I'm still using 9.1, and from the parallell port, I
> can't duplicate your problem.
I have only seen a couple of post about problems with 9.1 and zip
drives. I don't think those were related the hdx4 issue. I think that
appeared with 9.2.
> > I played around with mounting at partition 4 (as in all other
> > distros/releases I've used) then tried 1, 2, and 3 with no luck. I
> > don't know why I tried hdx with (no partition) but it worked!
>
> Funny. The other partitions will not work, unless formatted that way.
> But yes, I remember the issue being comented here, on list.
I knew it had always mounted at hdx4, but I was tired and ready to try
anything! That was easy to try and I've been surprised before when
something worked in an unexpected way. Since mounting at /dev/hdx I
have had no problems. I can read/write and even export through nfs so
other machines can use it.
> > I haven't had the time or desire to find out why this is. I
> > probably wouldn't understand it anyway.
>
> I understand. But, did you report to feedback? They really should
> know about this problem.
No I haven't. I just figured this was the 'new' and 'undocumented' to
mount a zip.
In another email in this thread you said:
"However, I think that the reason the device file is deleted every boot,
as some seem to report, should be worth investigating."
I truly can't say from personal experience that the device gets deleted.
The suggestion I read said to put the script in boot.local so the
device gets created on each boot. I just assumed it was deleted
everytime and had to be recreated.
Doug
| < Previous | Next > |