Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!news.bluesky.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!zib-berlin.de!news.tu-chemnitz.de!irz401!narcisa.sax.de!not-for-mail
From: j@narcisa.sax.de (J Wunsch)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: 2.0.5 tape blocksize???
Date: 14 Jun 1995 12:15:43 +0200
Organization: Private U**x site, Dresden.
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3rmcsf$53i@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de>
References: <3rja69$9fu@canyon.sr.hp.com>
Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.109.108.139
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Darryl Okahata <darrylo@sr.hp.com> wrote:
> When installing from DAT tape, what blocksize should be used for
>tar? Using the default blocksize (10240 bytes) when making the tape,
>the 2.0.5 install fails when reading the tape. The error message is
>something like the tape blocksize is too big. GNU tar 1.11.2 was used
>to make the tape.
This seems to be missing in the docs. Someone else posted that 5k is
the appropriate block size.
--
cheers, J"org private: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
http://www.sax.de/~joerg/
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)