ia,
immediately after receiving it and that did not help.
I have two linux kernel 2.6 on my computer. First I installed a
64 bit system. But I found that operating 32-bit application with
it, is not trivial, so I installed on a different partition a
kernel 2.6, 32 bit system. Neither recog
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 11:28:24PM +0300, Alexander Indenbaum wrote:
> ...
> Another advice is to reuse existing kernel configuration from
> /proc/config.gz, just change relevant kernel option and use 'make
> oldconfig' build procedure.
>
>
>
> --
> Alexander Indenbaum
Good morning, Alexander
On 5/15/06, Avraham Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 02:31:23AM +0300, Chaim Keren Tzion wrote:
>... My recommendation: Exchange the usbkey for a new one. There is a 255 to 1
> chance that the replacement, even the same brand, will be okay. You can
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 02:31:23AM +0300, Chaim Keren Tzion wrote:
>... My recommendation: Exchange the usbkey for a new one. There is a 255 to 1
> chance that the replacement, even the same brand, will be okay. You can also
> just recompile your kernel and remove the cumana support bu
On Tuesday 09 May 2006 03:48, Amos Shapira wrote:
> On 5/9/06, Chaim Keren Tzion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Okay so you have the same problem as I. Now hold onto your hat for the
> > answer, this is really wild.
>
> Indeed this is sorta wild.
>
> > My recom
On 5/9/06, Chaim Keren Tzion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Okay so you have the same problem as I. Now hold onto your hat for the answer,
this is really wild.
Indeed this is sorta wild.
My recommendation: Exchange the usbkey for a new one. There is a 255 to 1
Wouldn't a format o
Okay so you have the same problem as I. Now hold onto your hat for the answer,
this is really wild.
The simple version is that the usbkey is being recognized as having a
CUMANA/ADFS partition. It seems that 1 in 256 usbkeys will have this problem.
This is a very high number but most kernels do
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 12:10:18PM +0300, guy keren wrote:
>
> just out of curiousity - most USB disk-on-key devices i saw had a
> partition on them that was supposed to be mounted (i.e. you'd need to
> mount /dev/sdb1 or /dev/sdb3, rather then /dev/sdb).
>
> did you verify that you indeed should
On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 01:46:19PM +0300, Ilya Konstantinov wrote:
> Avraham Rosenberg wrote:
>
> >On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 11:45:14PM +0300, Chaim Keren Tzion wrote:
> >
> >>This sound very much like a problem I had/have. Does the dmesg show
> >>anything like this "[CUMANA/ADFS]" after connecti
Avraham Rosenberg wrote:
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 11:45:14PM +0300, Chaim Keren Tzion wrote:
This sound very much like a problem I had/have. Does the dmesg show anything
like this "[CUMANA/ADFS]" after connecting the disk-on-key?
Well, search the web then! Your disk-on-key's p
ns on this device?
--guy
On Sat, 6 May 2006, Avraham Rosenberg wrote:
> Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 10:02:28 +0300
> From: Avraham Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: linux-il@linux.org.il
> Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: problem with usb2
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat May 6 10:02:28 2006
Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 10:02:28 +0300
From: Avraham Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: linux-il@linux.org.il
Subject: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: problem with usb2.0 usbkey with kernel 2.6.8]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROT
- Forwarded message from avraham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: avraham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Chaim Keren Tzion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: linux-il@linux.org.il
Subject: Re: problem with usb2.0 usbkey with kernel 2.6.8
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 11:45:14PM +0300, Chaim Keren T
This sound very much like a problem I had/have. Does the dmesg show anything
like this "[CUMANA/ADFS]" after connecting the disk-on-key?
Mine looks like:
sdh: assuming drive cache: write through
sdh: [CUMANA/ADFS] sdh1<5>sd 6:0:0:0: Attached scsi removable disk sdh
But:
# fdisk -l /dev/sdh
Dis
On Wednesday 26 April 2006 20:25, Avraham Rosenberg wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 08:24:00PM +0300, shimi wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 April 2006 14:46, Avraham Rosenberg wrote:
> > > Hi,
> >
> > Check out 'dmesg' output after the mount; If I guess correctly, you'll
> > see an error relating to ei
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 08:24:00PM +0300, shimi wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 April 2006 14:46, Avraham Rosenberg wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Check out 'dmesg' output after the mount; If I guess correctly, you'll see an
> error relating to either Codepage or NLS. If I did guess correctly, your
> kernel does n
On Wednesday 26 April 2006 14:46, Avraham Rosenberg wrote:
> Hi,
> I found out that my Debian, kernel 2.6.8 which I installed
> lately, cannot handle my USB stick (fast, USB2.0 type). When I
> issue, as root, "mount -t vfat /dev/sda1 /mnt", the system
> answers: "wrong fs, bad superblock on /dev/sd
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 04:57:11PM +0300, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
> Avraham Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
..
>
> How is the stick formatted? Are you sure it is sda? Send the output of
>
> # fdisk -l /dev/sda
>
> ?
>
> --
> Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.goldshmidt.org
Avraham Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
> I found out that my Debian, kernel 2.6.8 which I installed
> lately, cannot handle my USB stick (fast, USB2.0 type). When I
> issue, as root, "mount -t vfat /dev/sda1 /mnt", the system
> answers: "wrong fs, bad superblock on /dev/sda1, missing
Hi,
I found out that my Debian, kernel 2.6.8 which I installed
lately, cannot handle my USB stick (fast, USB2.0 type). When I
issue, as root, "mount -t vfat /dev/sda1 /mnt", the system
answers: "wrong fs, bad superblock on /dev/sda1, missing codepage
or other error"
No problem when mounting, with a
20 matches
Mail list logo
