Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA22104
	for pups-liszt; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 02:55:02 +1000 (EST)
	(envelope-from owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au)
Received: from guildenstern.shaffstall.com (cisdn-2.on-net.net [206.229.84.2])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA22097
	for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au>; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 02:54:56 +1000 (EST)
	(envelope-from jasomill@shaffstall.com)
Received: from localhost (jasomill@localhost)
	by guildenstern.shaffstall.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA06434;
	Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:50:10 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: guildenstern.shaffstall.com: jasomill owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:50:10 -0500 (EST)
From: "Jason T. Miller" <jasomill@shaffstall.com>
To: Johnny Billquist <bqt@Update.UU.SE>
cc: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Subject: Re: RX50 on RQDX3 on 2.11BSD
In-Reply-To: <Pine.VUL.3.93.1000607080633.9260B-100000@Zeke.Update.UU.SE>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10006071140500.6407-100000@guildenstern.shaffstall.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

After looking at the data, I'm not suprised, either -- I've proven, if
nothing else, that the 'diff' command is not broken :) This command
seek-whence was for illusutrative purposes; by far the strangest thing to
me is the Interleave Problem. First R/W UNIX block device I've ever seen
that's not bijective (to slightly abuse the term).

-jtm

On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Johnny Billquist wrote:

> > WHOA! This shouldn't happen, should it?
> 
> Well... No... But...
> 
> You later note that 2.11 don't write the first two sectors, even though it
> don't give you any errors. So, I'm not surprised by the result.