Hi, On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 22:02:19 +0000 Kevanf1 <.> wrote:
On 21/03/06, pelibali <.> wrote:
... At present no further comments, but at least I'm glad that I could confirm, that a ZIP-drive causes no problems for older SUSE releases! Even if later installed. Another good test-candidate would be to get out my 250Mb "slow" drive and try to install it next time into my mom's compi or put another 100Mb drive into our SUSE 10.0 machine.
I'll be interested to hear the results if you do try this experiment. I too run a 250mb IDE internal Iomega Zip drive on my SuSE 10 PC.
I did both the tests I mentioned last time! To start from the very beginning I had troubles (SUSE 10.0) with an inter- nal 250MB ZIP drive and wanted to show that it is not because the drive capabilities ("less" DMA modes) and not because corrupted drive. Another internal, 100MB ZIP-drive worked flawlessly on my mom's SUSE 8.2... I simply swapped the two drives; SUSE 8.2 kept working very well with the 250MB drive; a 95MB backup took reasonable time, but SUSE 10.0 performed sh*t, I got ~7.5kb per second! I couldn't wait, until 5Mb finishes:( (Additionally I knew that for backup purposes on the SUSE 10.0 machine I had to bootup e.g. SUSE 9.1 live distro and that one worked with both drives very well.) I know about the bug-reports and the work-arounds, which should ensure full FAT-writing speed on various media, but the official tips didn't solve anything. I'm lucky to have a 9.3 image somewhere and will rewrite that; SUSE 10.0 is not suitable for my own needs. Likely try to go back to 9.3 or prefe- rably to 9.1 Pro. Regards, Pelibali