2006-09-23 (土) の 09:39 -0400 に Claude Jones さんは書きました: > On Friday September 22 2006 11:56 pm, Joel Rees wrote: > > On 2006/09/23, at 11:30, Claude Jones wrote: > > > What are you talking about? > > > > Good question. Like I said in my earlier post, the advice my be > > outdated. For all I know it may not apply to Linux kernel and drivers > > written after a certain year, probably before 1999 if that's the > > case. I've never seen it myself that I know of, but then I've mostly > > avoided MSWindows compatible hardware. And the companies I've worked > > for have tended to not fully populate a channel. > > > > You could plug something like "master slave ata corruption" in a > > search at Google and get some interesting reading, though. > > > > The sales guy at Pasokon Kobo over in Mikage a couple of years back > > warned me against trying to use both master and slave at the same > > time, but they admitted to not having much experience with Linux. In > > the MSWindows universe they were familiar with, there were enough > > reports of silent corruption they figured it was best to stay with > > one channel, one drive, particularly when building RAID on ATA > > controllers. > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but master and slave on a single channel > > can't handle commands concurrently? What I recall reading was that it > > was known that some companies' drivers for MSWindows were known to > > fail to keep state straight between calls, but I remember reading > > some guy who said that even the hardware would lose state in certain > > situations. And the corruption would tend to be silent, no warnings > > until it was too late. > > > > So, some salesman told you something once, you bought into it, found a couple > of references on the net that seemed to buttress your hypothesis, and you're > suggesting that _I_ google something to corroborate your salesman-informant's > theory. I have no doubt that there could have been problems at times with > Master/Slave configurations. Then why the argument? Wouldn't it be better to post a mini-tutorial about how you have set up your successful dual-booting master-slave configurations? > Witness the current mess that is the USB > protocol. It doesn't seem to me, however, that you have a lot to offer to > back up what was a pretty strong assertion on your part. > > > > I have been building my own machines since 1989,..... > > > > MSWindows or Linux? BSD? Mac? Controllers limited to certain > > manufacturers? Did the usage patterns tend to be such that only one > > drive was used at a time, as in boot and run this drive or that, only > > use the other drive for backups performed during break? Can you > > guarantee there was no silent corruption? (regular diffs between > > backups or such?) > > > > Again, you seem to want me to buttress your salesman's theory. And that > question about "silent corruption" is pure moxy... > > > > Yet, in all that time, with all those machines, I've never encountered > > > problems with drive conflicts, except ones I've caused myself due > > > to improper > > > jumpering. For the second time in a month on this list, someone has > > > alluded > > > to such problems but with no details. What sorts of problems have > > > you had? I > > > would like to know in case I encounter such in the future. > > > > Like I say, I have not seen drive failures I can pin on this > > particular issue. What I know is second hand, from the web...... > > So, you haven't seen this problem you declared to exist so forcefully, and > you've only read about it "second hand, from the web" - My suggestion - first > activate brain, then once it's spun up to speed, engage fingers... > > As some one said the other day .net stands for 'not entire true'... > -- > Claude Jones > Brunswick, MD, USA > -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
