home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
AMIGA PD 1
/
AMIGA-PD-1.iso
/
NetBSD
/
docs-netbsd
/
Mailinglist-Archive
/
1994-08.gz
/
1994-08
/
000047_owner-amiga@sun…s.berkeley.edu_Tue Aug 2 00:22:36 1994.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-10-16
|
2KB
|
51 lines
From: "Stephen J. Roznowski" <sjr@zombie.ncsc.mil>
To: donn@u.washington.edu
Subject: Re: Archive Viper 150 not working with 1.0_BETA
Cc: amiga@sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu
Sender: owner-amiga@sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu
> From: Donn Cave <donn@u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: Archive Viper 150 not working with 1.0_BETA
> To: sjr@zombie.ncsc.mil (Stephen J. Roznowski)
> Date: Mon, 1 Aug 1994 09:13:28 -0700 (PDT)
>
> | My Archive Viper tape drive no longer seems to be working under
> | 1.0_BETA. (940726 sup) using the A3000 kernel. Whenever I attempt to
> | access the drive, I get the following errors:
> |
> | st0(ahsc0:4:0): illegal request
> | st0: cannot set selected mode
> |
> | But it appears to be found during autoconfig:
> |
> | ahsc0 targ 4 lun 0: <ARCHIVE VIPER 150 21247-011> SCSI1 sequential removable
> | st0 at scsibus0: rogue, density code 0x0, 512-byte blocks, write-enabled
>
> Sounds like it's trying to set a bad block size or density. The ``rogue''
> business means that the driver has specific support for this model, and
> you can get different block size or density settings with different minor
> modes.
>
> It's kind of random, and I'm not looking at the source (sys/scsi/st.c),
> so I can't say which options are which. The options are controlled by
> the 4 and 8 bits, plus 1 for no-rewind, so you might try both of them
> mknod rst4 c 20 4 mknod rst8 c 20 8 (from memory.)
I've tried various combinations of device numbers, but none seem to work.
(0-20 if I remember correctly, both block and character).
> I have fallen a bit behind in the great race to kernel perfection here,
> and the above really comes from early July. It may not be worth much,
> since I suppose your tape drive was working at that time. Still it sounds
> very much like that's the problem.
>
> I feel like tape support took a big dive when we switched over to the
> main tree, and I'm a little worried that getting fixes into the main tree
> st driver will be difficult. Hope not. Your drive has got to be one of
> the more common models in use out there, we could at least hope to work
> with that.
I would hope that this will be fixed before 1.0 is out, otherwise, I think
that we are in for some major problems.....
-SR