> wrenread: error on w0(1691022): %r something's wrong here. %r never prints "%r" unless errstr is literaly "%r". does your source match sources?
> where w0 is the disk itself. Note that the final message > states 89805 blocks were copied, whereas initially > 89806 blocks were queued - was the error on just this one > block? If so, what could possibly be the reason? I doubt > my USB drive would be acting up. why couldn't your usb drive have a bad sector or some other problem? you could even get less than the requested number of bytes without an error. read(2) says that it's perfectly fine for pread to return less than the requested number of bytes. to be really safe, wrenread should use something like preadn. i would think that usb would be a bit antisocial if pread returned less than the requested number of bytes if RBUFSIZE <= 64k. but otoh, if it really is a hardware limit, it would make sense. we'd just call the hardware antisocial in that case. ☺ - erik
