home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rutgers!cmcl2!panix!alexis
- From: alexis@panix.com (Alexis Rosen)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.aux
- Subject: Re: SUMMARY: disktab entry for Quantum LP240S
- Message-ID: <1992Jul21.085342.22220@panix.com>
- Date: 21 Jul 92 08:53:42 GMT
- References: <1992Jul20.124257.1946@wl.com> <847@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov>
- Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
- Lines: 51
-
- jim@jagubox.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Jagielski) writes:
- >duffiem@wl.com (Mark Duffield) writes:
- >>Sorry that it's taken me so long to compile this. An interesting thing
- >>happened as I assembled a disktab entry for the Quantum LP240S. I came up
- >>with two different ones. The first entry I assembled with the help of HD
- >>Toolkit as described in the FAQ. I was told that the number of tracks per
- >>cylinder is actually the number of heads. Someone (Alexis Rosen I think) told
- >>me that that drive spins at 4400rpm.
-
- >>The following is the disktab entry I put together:
-
- >>LP240S|Quantum240:\
- >> :ty=winchester:nc#1818:ns#87:nt#4:rm#4400:
- >>
- >>The second entry (and associated text) I received from a friend at Apple.
- >>The text of the AppleLine message follows:
- >>># Quantum LP240S, Apple 230MB drive
- >>>#
- >>>LP240S|HD230SC:\
- >>> :ty=winchester:ns=60:nt=4:nc=1930:
- >>>
- >>So, now I have a problem. First, which one do I use? And second, why does
- >>Apple's disktab entry differ from the one that I was able to assemble using HD
- >>Toolkit. Not one parameter is the same (except for ty).
-
- >I would place a bit more "trust" in what FWB HDT reports since:
-
- > 1. It's looking at _your_ drive, not a "listing" of
- > drive parameters. In other words, it's looking at the
- > geometry entries in the disk's mode pages.
-
- > 2. It's possible that the person at Apple was mistaken.
-
- > 3. It's possible that the LP240S underwent some modifications,
- > so the Apple suggested entries are out-of-date.
-
- > 4. On disks that do zoned-bit recording, the 'ns' entry is kinda
- > incorrect... rather it's an average value to be used. So if only
- > the 'ns' entries differed by a bit, I wouldn't care. Having the
- > 'nc' entries differ indicates something different and can't be
- > explained due to zoned-bit recording...
-
- In case anyone missed it... All of the above is reasonable, but it's not
- so in this case. The FWB-derived entry is _very_ wrong- just multiply out the
- numbers and you'll find that it claims that the 240MB quantum holds 316MB...
-
- --
- Alexis Rosen Owner/Sysadmin,
- PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC.
- alexis@panix.com
- {uupsi,cmcl2}!panix!alexis
-