*BSD News Article 45774


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nexus.coast.net!news.kei.com!hookup!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!brutus.bright.net!infoserv.illinois.net!one.mind.net!news
From: laird@mind.net (Alan Laird)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: problems with scsi tape drive.
Date: 22 Jun 1995 13:04:44 GMT
Organization: InfoStructure
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <3sbppc$lj1@one.mind.net>
References: <3sabkt$e1b@one.mind.net> <3sb0t8$j7p@news.cs.tu-berlin.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: abraxas.mind.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.11

In article <3sb0t8$j7p@news.cs.tu-berlin.de>, nuggets@cs.tu-berlin.de 
says...
>
>Alan Laird (laird@mind.net) wrote:
>: Hello,
>
>: I am running 2.0-950412-SNAP on a machine with a buslogic 445c vlb 
>: controller.  I am a little unclear as to which device I should use 
with 
>: mt and dump to make archives on this scsi dat drive.  I have tried 
using 
>
>: mt /dev/st0 offline
>
>: makes the tape drive light up but...
>
>mt -f /dev/nrst0 offline
>should work.
>
>n=no rewind, that means that you can do multiple dumps on the same tape
>r=raw device, rst0=character device, st0=block device
>
>mt -f /dev/nrst0 fsf 3 jumps over 3 backups, so that you can make the 
4th.
>
>Lars.
> 
>-- 

Well, I couldn't let this one rest so i worked through the night on it 
and stumbled across something interesting.  I did try mt -f /dev/rst0 
offline and a number of other things without success.  After beating my 
head on the scsi kernel code trying to figure out why it was not working, 
I decided to examine my cabling and scsi ids.  My hd is on scsi id 0, my 
cdrom at 1 and my tape drive at 2.  When I boot, I see the kernel 
messages that indicate that it has found the drive and gotten the label. 
 On the offchance that it might help (I would have tried black magic at 
this point had I known any), I changed my scsi id on the tape drive to 3 
and rebooted.  

This time, the exact same commands produced success.  I will try moving 
the scsi id back to 2 this evening to see if I can duplicate the previous 
error condition.

go figure,

Alan Laird
laird@mind.net