Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!pollux.usc.edu!kjh
From: kjh@pollux.usc.edu (Kenneth J. Hendrickson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: BADBLOCKS PH 1.5
Message-ID: <30460@usc>
Date: 17 Feb 91 08:02:43 GMT
References: <1991Feb16.190126.10955@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: news@usc
Organization: EE-Systems, USC, Los Angeles
Lines: 17
Nntp-Posting-Host: pollux.usc.edu

In article <1991Feb16.190126.10955@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu> ssharkey@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Scott A Sharkey) writes:
>I just put up PH 1.5 (is it 1.5.10??), and I think the badblocks program
>is still screwed up when it comes to bad blocks greater than 8K.

I just used badblocks on a 48k partition.  It worked flawlessly.  I
checked.

However, for block numbers greater than 32767, badblocks reported a
negative block number during the verification stage.  I didn't look at
the code, but I'd bet that signed integers were used where unsigned
integers would have been more appropriate.

I'm using Minix 1.5.10.

-- 
favourite oxymorons:   student athlete, military justice, mercy killing
Ken Hendrickson N8DGN/6       kjh@usc.edu      ...!uunet!usc!pollux!kjh