SEO

Hello from the Eighth Doctor
I have two computers here. One is a Dell, he sometimes has Zipslack installed. The
other is a no-name brand. He has now, version 10.1 of Slackware installed natively.
When I've got Zipslack installed and running perfectly, I attempt to view the
contents of a Zip 100 disk while running Linux. That disk would be a FAT16
formatted one. It would then cause a glitch while using mtools to view, or otherwise
manipulate the contents. However, on the other one, and with the exact same type of
drive installed on it, this didn't happen. I am now bringing over files from a bundle
of disks. Comments, please?
---
Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net
"This signature is invalid, please reset."

The Eighth Doctor wrote:

> ... I attempt to view the contents of a Zip 100 disk while running
> Linux. ... It would then cause a glitch while using mtools to view, or
> otherwise manipulate the contents. However, on the other one, and with
> the exact same type of drive installed on it, this didn't happen. I
> am now bringing over files from a bundle of disks. Comments, please?

Perhaps if you could provide a diff of computer1:/usr/src/linux/.config
against computer2:/usr/src/linux/.config, as well as a diff of
computer1:`dmesg` against computer2:`dmesg` (each taken shortly after
booting, preferably; it's the boot messages themselves that I'm after
here), there might be something for us to go on. This certainly isn't
going to be an easy one to solve, and having as much information
as possible will no doubt help ... If you can think of additional
comparisons to provide, by all means please feel free ...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sylvain Robitaille syl@alcor.concordia.ca

Systems analyst Concordia University
Instructional & Information Technology Montreal, Quebec, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Eighth Doctor wrote:
> Hello from the Eighth Doctor
> I have two computers here. One is a Dell, he sometimes has Zipslack installed. The
> other is a no-name brand. He has now, version 10.1 of Slackware installed natively.
> When I've got Zipslack installed and running perfectly, I attempt to view the
> contents of a Zip 100 disk while running Linux. That disk would be a FAT16
> formatted one. It would then cause a glitch while using mtools to view, or otherwise
> manipulate the contents. However, on the other one, and with the exact same type of
> drive installed on it, this didn't happen. I am now bringing over files from a bundle
> of disks. Comments, please?
> ---
> Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net
> "This signature is invalid, please reset."
>

IIRC, the earlier (IDE) Zip drives did not act or react like the later
Zips did. IOMega used to provide special drivers for Windows, to access
(read/write) the earlier drives.

Could your problem be that your Zip drives are one of each generation?


--

humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net

In article <37es0jF5d0i0rU1@individual.net>, HuMJohn@aeroSurf.net says...
>
>The Eighth Doctor wrote:
>> Hello from the Eighth Doctor
>> I have two computers here. One is a Dell, he sometimes has Zipslack installed.
The
>> other is a no-name brand. He has now, version 10.1 of Slackware installed
natively.
>> When I've got Zipslack installed and running perfectly, I attempt to view the
>> contents of a Zip 100 disk while running Linux. That disk would be a FAT16
>> formatted one. It would then cause a glitch while using mtools to view, or
otherwise
>> manipulate the contents. However, on the other one, and with the exact same
type of
>> drive installed on it, this didn't happen. I am now bringing over files from a
bundle
>> of disks. Comments, please?
>> ---
>> Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net
>> "This signature is invalid, please reset."
>>
>
>IIRC, the earlier (IDE) Zip drives did not act or react like the later
>Zips did. IOMega used to provide special drivers for Windows, to access
>(read/write) the earlier drives.
>
>Could your problem be that your Zip drives are one of each generation?
>
>
>--
>
> humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net
Hello from the Eighth Doctor
Could be... But I don't think so. What time period are you thinking of? I got the Dell
in March of 1999. And the Zip Drive about a month or two later. The one that the
current Slacker is wearing is from the same time period.
--
Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net
"This signature is invalid, please reset."

The Eighth Doctor wrote:
> In article <37es0jF5d0i0rU1@individual.net>, HuMJohn@aeroSurf.net says...
>
>>The Eighth Doctor wrote:
>>
>>>Hello from the Eighth Doctor
>>>I have two computers here. One is a Dell, he sometimes has Zipslack installed.
>
> The
>
>>>other is a no-name brand. He has now, version 10.1 of Slackware installed
>
> natively.
>
>>>When I've got Zipslack installed and running perfectly, I attempt to view the
>>>contents of a Zip 100 disk while running Linux. That disk would be a FAT16
>>>formatted one. It would then cause a glitch while using mtools to view, or
>
> otherwise
>
>>>manipulate the contents. However, on the other one, and with the exact same
>
> type of
>
>>>drive installed on it, this didn't happen. I am now bringing over files from a
>
> bundle
>
>>>of disks. Comments, please?
>>>---
>>>Gregg drwho8 atsign att dot net
>>>"This signature is invalid, please reset."
>>>
>>
>>IIRC, the earlier (IDE) Zip drives did not act or react like the later
>>Zips did. IOMega used to provide special drivers for Windows, to access
>>(read/write) the earlier drives.
>>

> Could be... But I don't think so. What time period are you thinking of? I got the Dell
> in March of 1999. And the Zip Drive about a month or two later. The one that the
> current Slacker is wearing is from the same time period.
> --
>
I am thinking the era from '98 to about 2000. After 2000, the Zip drives
no longer needed Win drivers for them (I mean the same version of
Windows that the other drives required OEM drivers for them to work). I
can not get any closer in a time frame than that.

I would guess the drives change right about the 250 Meg drives started
to come down in price to the range of decently affordable. :-) And the
100Meg drives just stayed around the same price range as previous.


--

humjohn AT aerosurf DOT net

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 09:42:39 -0800, HJohnson <HuMJohn@aeroSurf.net> wrote:

>The Eighth Doctor wrote:
>> In article <37es0jF5d0i0rU1@individual.net>, HuMJohn@aeroSurf.net says...
>>
.. . .
>> Could be... But I don't think so. What time period are you thinking of? I got the Dell
>> in March of 1999. And the Zip Drive about a month or two later. The one that the
>> current Slacker is wearing is from the same time period.
>> --
>>
>I am thinking the era from '98 to about 2000. After 2000, the Zip drives
>no longer needed Win drivers for them (I mean the same version of
>Windows that the other drives required OEM drivers for them to work). I
>can not get any closer in a time frame than that.
>
>I would guess the drives change right about the 250 Meg drives started
>to come down in price to the range of decently affordable. :-) And the
>100Meg drives just stayed around the same price range as previous.

I have ATAPI and a parallel port version.

I'm not clear if OP has instead a format issue? Iomega format zip-100
as hard drive, using partition 4, if one was to reformat zip-disk, one
has the choice of super-floppy (no partition table), or perhaps messing
with original partition table? See /usr/doc/Linux-HOWTOs/ZIP-Drive
for info on this as well as the IDE/ATAPI issue.

As far as timing goes, I bought parallel port type in '97 and ATAPI
drive s/h from auction site in early 2001.

Recently I tried ATAPI drive in my main PC, it prevented PC from booting,
messed up bootable cdrom detection, was slave connected to 80-way ribbon
with cdrom master. I moved ATAPI zip back to an older AMD K6-2 box on
40-way ribbon and it behaves. The ATAPI drive runs the slowest PIO mode
interface.

Then, there's the 'click of death' issue -- bad drive wrecks media,
you'd know if you had that, as the wrecked media kills any other
drive it is used with. Mechanical: rips the drive heads out, from
what I've read...

Cheers,
Grant.