| To: | linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Could mounting sdc instead of sdc1 have solved my panics? |
| From: | ralf@uni-koblenz.de |
| Date: | Thu, 30 Apr 1998 00:28:10 +0200 |
| Cc: | Alex deVries <adevries@engsoc.carleton.ca>, SGI Linux <linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.3.95.980429172646.16310M-100000@lager.engsoc.carleton.ca>; from Alex deVries on Wed, Apr 29, 1998 at 05:29:55PM -0400 |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.3.95.980429172646.16310M-100000@lager.engsoc.carleton.ca> |
| Sender: | owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com |
I don't see any reason why the kernel should crash when using sdc instead of a partition. So I forward this to linux-kernel in the hope anybody knows. On Wed, Apr 29, 1998 at 05:29:55PM -0400, Alex deVries wrote: > I redid my entire sdc because all my files were trashed on it anyway (with > weird things like .h files having random data partway through...). This > time I partitioned using fx on Irix. > > I didn't partition it the first time because I was lazy, and din't want to > have to go through the weirdo fx tool thing. > > Could this have been cause for my kernel panics? I've been doing a fair > amount of work, and things seem really stable. No panics so far. Should > /dev/sdc work just as a block device the way /dev/sdc1 would? Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: strace status?, ralf |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: strace status?, Alex deVries |
| Previous by Thread: | Could mounting sdc instead of sdc1 have solved my panics?, Alex deVries |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Could mounting sdc instead of sdc1 have solved my panics?, Alan Cox |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |