[plug] Kernel-2.2.13 and LS120 and ...

[Garry]

Last semester I was supplying LS120s to fellow CS students at Murdoch. At
one stage I got 2 dodgy disks from a box of ten. On my returning them to my
wholesailer, they were swapped for new ones, no prob. I did test them on my
own external drive and they were definately at fault. These were the only
bad ones I've had.

I was finding the dud ones wouldn't copy big files, like the 50 odd Mb file
used in B229 Linux labs.. Otherwise OK..

I now have 3 disks, allowing me to have all the files I could possibly need
and the space to enjoy the download times.. I've been using the same 3 for 9
months, and the physical precaution I take is to use a plastic 1.44 Mb box
(holds 10). But even 1.44s die if bruised, boiled, bleached or burnt!

If you see me at uni today (Thursday), I can put it into my portable drive
as a test.
You probably know me, big fella with a red beard..

Garry


Kenworthy Family wrote:

> Just loaded on 2.2.13 - No fuss so far, seems faster, not sure why
> unless I selected something that I had not used before in the setup that
> made a difference.  On the uk kernel site, mention was made of 2.2.13
> fixing some file corruption problems but were not specific.  Does anyone
> know of the details.  I am having non-specific problems with an LS120 as
> HDD.  I use it to transfer files between home & murdoch uni.  chkdsk'ing
> at murdoch often shows fs corruption of different types.  I suspect at
> least some is caused by mtools and have proven another case where moving
> the disk between NT machines at murdoch - transferred a couple of files
> onto the disk, then disk unreadable on two other machines in another
> lab.  No magnets in the case with the disks etc.  Has anyone else
> experienced similar problems with LS120's.  They are getting quite a bad
> reputation at Murdoch with many shying away from them due to cost and
> the fact that the data seems at risk
>
> BillK