FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-21-2008, 05:09 AM
Craig White
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:02 +1030, Tim wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 22:14 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> > All of the trivia quoted above is absolutely pointless with the
> > exception that you want to use pointless trivia to proffer your
> > knowledge.
>
> What you call "trivia" is factual information about what's involved.
> You wanted me to back up my assertion, I've just explained all the
> background information for you. Now you want to call the information
> that explains it as pointless. Since you don't understand it, ask
> someone else to confirm it for you.
>
> You remind me of lay people who, upon being advised by their doctor, who
> actually know what they're talking about, say "pfft, what would they
> know?"
>
> > If you actually knew of some commercial USB cable that was being sold
> > that was incapable of handling USB 2.0, you might have actually
> > offered information that was useful to someone.
>
> Do you realise how stupid it is to even ask that? How many hundreds of
> brands may be available for purchase? How many different brands in
> different places that aren't available at the other places? How many
> that are fine, but aren't mentioned by someone, so people won't buy
> them? How many of the same product are sold by different labels? How
> many of different products are sold under the same label?
----
I was hoping that you could name just one commercially available USB
cable that was not usable for USB 2.0

Craig

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 07:16 AM
Ed Greshko
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

Craig White wrote:

On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:02 +1030, Tim wrote:


Do you realise how stupid it is to even ask that? How many hundreds of
brands may be available for purchase? How many different brands in
different places that aren't available at the other places? How many
that are fine, but aren't mentioned by someone, so people won't buy
them? How many of the same product are sold by different labels? How
many of different products are sold under the same label?


----
I was hoping that you could name just one commercially available USB
cable that was not usable for USB 2.0

Craig

Somehow I can't imagine how unimportant that question is.... But, if
you want me to pick you up a few of them from the cheap computer swap
shops here in Taipei I'll get a few and send them to you. While I'm at
it, I'll even get you some cheap CDs or DVDs that produce coasters 5-10%
of the time.


--
A mind is a wonderful thing to waste.

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 12:08 PM
"André Costa"
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

Ho John,

On Jan 21, 2008 12:57 AM, John Thompson <john@vector.os2.dhs.org> wrote:
> On 2008-01-20, André Costa <blueser@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> What does fdisk say about the device? You can have fdisk write a new,
> >> empty partition table to start fresh and then create your new
> >> partitions..
>
> > This is my main problem right now: I don't even get to see the device,
> > since USB layer refuses me access to it =( Once I get past this, I'm
> > pretty sure it should be recoverable as "any screwed" SATA HDD is (eg.
> > using fdisk, as you suggested).
>
> Have you tried unloading all the usb modules (using rmmod) and then
> reloading them? Or as a last, desparate attempt, rebooting to reset the
> hardware and reload the modules fresh?

Unfortunately, yes. Googling for my error message I found some people
saying that removing ehci_hcd could do the trick. I tried it, but It
didn't help me (I even removed all USB modules -- ohci_hcd, uhci_hcd).
I also tried to plug the drive back after a reboot, no luck =(

Thks anyway,

Andre

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 01:15 PM
Tim
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 11:22 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> I think this is the difference in our thinking.
>
> When I don't have knowledge of something, I actually cite the best
> source I have and relate that I haven't seen any information that
> disputes it.

When faced with something you don't know anything about, you quote from
someone else and just depend on faith that they're correct.

> Here you have stated an argument without any evidence to substantiate
> your beliefs.

I quote from knowledge, what I already know about, through education and
experience. As a simple example, if I answer a question using Ohms law
I don't also prove Ohms law at the same time. Though, if the other
person then asks for more information, I'll give it if it's not too
painful to do.

You might have tried a less antagonistic way of asking how I provided
that information in the first place. On the basis of your current
argument, you need to be backing up every thing you advise on this list
with supportive evidence. NB: Saying that some guy from some company
told you something doesn't count.

> Thanks for your theories...I would probably believe them if I hadn't
> caught you talking about things your didn't know in the past.

If you're going to cast such accusations, you better back that up with
references.

You've already stated that you didn't know about what I discussed (in
depth), then argued against me. That doesn't sound like you're
discussing this situation on good footing.

--
(This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's
important to the thread.)

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 01:26 PM
Tim
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 23:09 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> I was hoping that you could name just one commercially available USB
> cable that was not usable for USB 2.0

I've come across the "Laser" branded USB cables, the sort of thing sold
in supermarkets, that failed dismally with a DVD burner.

I suppose that, next, you'd like to argue about cat 3 cable being
perfectly adequate for gigabit networking. Never mind that it was never
designed for it, in the first place.

Typically, manufacturers design their products to a minimum expenditure.
If they brought out a USB cable at the time that only 12 Mb/s USB
existed, they'd design it for that, and wouldn't go the extra expense of
making it fine at 480 MB/s, as well. Why would they? It's just a
waste. That's a significant difference in signals (40:1), and there's
quite a few reasons why it mightn't work (loss across the length, loss
between the conductors, impedance issues getting more finicky with
higher frequencies, etc.). But there's just one reason why it might
work - pot luck.

Don't believe me? Ask the guys who work in RF on this list about RF
cabling characteristics. But you better be good at maths and physics if
you want to understand the proofs.

--
(This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's
important to the thread.)

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 02:15 PM
Craig White
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:16 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:02 +1030, Tim wrote:
> >
> >> Do you realise how stupid it is to even ask that? How many hundreds of
> >> brands may be available for purchase? How many different brands in
> >> different places that aren't available at the other places? How many
> >> that are fine, but aren't mentioned by someone, so people won't buy
> >> them? How many of the same product are sold by different labels? How
> >> many of different products are sold under the same label?
> >>
> > ----
> > I was hoping that you could name just one commercially available USB
> > cable that was not usable for USB 2.0
> >
> > Craig
> >
> Somehow I can't imagine how unimportant that question is.... But, if
> you want me to pick you up a few of them from the cheap computer swap
> shops here in Taipei I'll get a few and send them to you. While I'm at
> it, I'll even get you some cheap CDs or DVDs that produce coasters 5-10%
> of the time.
----
I've made my share of coasters but that is an entirely separate topic.

How I got to this particular issue was my own experience with an
external USB drive.

While experiencing problems with the drive, I called this particular
company's tech support and because they had already replaced the drive
once, I was speaking to the supervisor. While discussing the problem, I
told him that I was no longer certain that the USB cable that I was
using was the same cable supplied with the drive. The guy from tech
support told me that he was unconcerned and that if the cable appeared
to be undamaged, it in all likelihood wasn't the problem and that in his
view, all commercially available USB device cables (6 foot and less)
were suitable for using with their USB 2.0 drives.

I have seen nothing to disprove that statement, either from my own
experience nor even the anecdotal experience of others. Only Tim's
theories and Tim is long on theories.

I do not dispute the fact that you are capable of finding something
manufactured so cheaply as to be worthless but it would likely be
worthless for USB 1.1 too.

Craig

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 02:51 PM
Ed Greshko
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

Craig White wrote:

On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:16 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:


Craig White wrote:


On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:02 +1030, Tim wrote:



Do you realise how stupid it is to even ask that? How many hundreds of
brands may be available for purchase? How many different brands in
different places that aren't available at the other places? How many
that are fine, but aren't mentioned by someone, so people won't buy
them? How many of the same product are sold by different labels? How
many of different products are sold under the same label?



----
I was hoping that you could name just one commercially available USB
cable that was not usable for USB 2.0

Craig


Somehow I can't imagine how unimportant that question is.... But, if
you want me to pick you up a few of them from the cheap computer swap
shops here in Taipei I'll get a few and send them to you. While I'm at
it, I'll even get you some cheap CDs or DVDs that produce coasters 5-10%
of the time.


----
I've made my share of coasters but that is an entirely separate topic.


No, it isn't.

There are substandard products everywhere one looks. And there are
products that were built to satisfy a given standard but don't pass
muster when the standard is updated. You just seem bent on trying to
have Tim name a given product that will work on USB 1.0 but won't work
on USB 2.0. Frankly, it is boring.


I don't doubt that there are cables out there that work perfectly well
with USB 1.0 and fail with USB 2.0. Just like I don't doubt that there
are 10BaseT cables that work just fine at 10Mbps and not so good at
100Mbps....because I have experienced that end of the spectrum. But, I
don't have to see them and touch them to know they exist.


They exist. And, frankly, having been on the hardware end of
manufacturing super computers, I could tell you some wonderful stories
about coaxial cables used in the Control Data Cyber 205. But, you
probably won't believe me either.


Oh, that that "supervisor" that wasn't concerned or wouldn't even
consider a cable problem is just plan...well how can I put
it...ahhh....wrong.

But, tell you what....you can go on believing what you will.

But, it is truly unimportant why you are trying to "prove". So,
whatever.....


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 03:38 PM
Craig White
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 23:51 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:16 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> >
> >> Craig White wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 16:02 +1030, Tim wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Do you realise how stupid it is to even ask that? How many hundreds of
> >>>> brands may be available for purchase? How many different brands in
> >>>> different places that aren't available at the other places? How many
> >>>> that are fine, but aren't mentioned by someone, so people won't buy
> >>>> them? How many of the same product are sold by different labels? How
> >>>> many of different products are sold under the same label?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> ----
> >>> I was hoping that you could name just one commercially available USB
> >>> cable that was not usable for USB 2.0
> >>>
> >>> Craig
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Somehow I can't imagine how unimportant that question is.... But, if
> >> you want me to pick you up a few of them from the cheap computer swap
> >> shops here in Taipei I'll get a few and send them to you. While I'm at
> >> it, I'll even get you some cheap CDs or DVDs that produce coasters 5-10%
> >> of the time.
> >>
> > ----
> > I've made my share of coasters but that is an entirely separate topic.
> >
> No, it isn't.
>
> There are substandard products everywhere one looks. And there are
> products that were built to satisfy a given standard but don't pass
> muster when the standard is updated. You just seem bent on trying to
> have Tim name a given product that will work on USB 1.0 but won't work
> on USB 2.0. Frankly, it is boring.
>
> I don't doubt that there are cables out there that work perfectly well
> with USB 1.0 and fail with USB 2.0. Just like I don't doubt that there
> are 10BaseT cables that work just fine at 10Mbps and not so good at
> 100Mbps....because I have experienced that end of the spectrum. But, I
> don't have to see them and touch them to know they exist.
>
> They exist. And, frankly, having been on the hardware end of
> manufacturing super computers, I could tell you some wonderful stories
> about coaxial cables used in the Control Data Cyber 205. But, you
> probably won't believe me either.
>
> Oh, that that "supervisor" that wasn't concerned or wouldn't even
> consider a cable problem is just plan...well how can I put
> it...ahhh....wrong.
>
> But, tell you what....you can go on believing what you will.
>
> But, it is truly unimportant why you are trying to "prove". So,
> whatever.....
----
it seems that you are ignoring the reality that Cat 3 cables (10Base-T)
are physically different than Cat 5 cables. Cat 3 cables needed only 4
wires and Cat 5 cables needed 8, thus expecting a Cat 3 cable to work
properly at 100Base-T is not realistic at all. This of course ignores
the different twisting requirements for shielding.

Substandard products everywhere such as CD's are not relevant to the
issue of USB cables and no amount of reaching is going to make it so.
Coaxial cables indeed have been subjected to shifts in technology quite
clearly, the bandwidths needs have caused adoption of newer types of
cables.

Clearly USB Hubs are labeled suitable for USB 1.1 or 2.0 standards but
USB cables typically not identified. If the manufacturers of USB 2.0
hard drives were concerned with the cables that were used, they would
clearly identify their products with something like - "USE ONLY WITH USB
2.0 CERTIFIED CABLES" but I've never seen that. I look at Western
Digital's 'Interface Guide'
http://westerndigital.com/en/library/2579-001151.pdf and see no such
admonitions.

Craig

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 04:31 PM
"Mikkel L. Ellertson"
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

Craig White wrote:

it seems that you are ignoring the reality that Cat 3 cables (10Base-T)
are physically different than Cat 5 cables. Cat 3 cables needed only 4
wires and Cat 5 cables needed 8, thus expecting a Cat 3 cable to work
properly at 100Base-T is not realistic at all. This of course ignores
the different twisting requirements for shielding.

I could have sworn that the CAT 3 cable I used for networking was 4
pair, and not 2 pair. I can remember some 2 pair cable use for POT
connections, but every networking application was 4 pair. Now, both
10BaseT and 100BaseTx only use 2 pair, but the cable is normally 4
pair. Now, there is a difference a physical difference between CAT 3
and CAT 5, but it has more to do with how the pairs are twisted
together then the number of wires. The number of wists/inch, and the
relationship between the number of twists in each pair change the
electrical characteristics of the cable. (Each pair has a different
twist rate.) I think how the pairs are twisted together in the cable
is also specified.


What gets interesting is that with the proper test equipment, you
can detect the different twist rate of the cable, the total length,
any connections in the run, and even sharp bends in the cable. You
can also tell the difference between CAT 3 and CAT 5 cable. I have
to admit that the equipment that does this is a lot more expensive
then a simple pair tester, but when you have to certify an
installation, it is necessary. (cable length, noise level,
crosstalk, etc...)


Mikkel
--

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 01-21-2008, 04:48 PM
"Mikkel L. Ellertson"
 
Default HELP: External 250G USB screwed with GParted

Craig White wrote:


Clearly USB Hubs are labeled suitable for USB 1.1 or 2.0 standards but
USB cables typically not identified. If the manufacturers of USB 2.0
hard drives were concerned with the cables that were used, they would
clearly identify their products with something like - "USE ONLY WITH USB
2.0 CERTIFIED CABLES" but I've never seen that. I look at Western
Digital's 'Interface Guide'
http://westerndigital.com/en/library/2579-001151.pdf and see no such
admonitions.

Just about ever packaged USB cable I have seen has indicated if it
met the USB 1.1 or 2.0 specifications. There is even a different
USB logo for 1.1 and 2.0. Once they are out of the package, it may
be hard to tell. Some of my USB cables are labeled, and others are
not. I have a cable in front of me that has "HIGH SPEED USB REVISION
2.0" on the cable. If I were to dig through some old cables, I could
probably find one that has "USB REVISION 1.1" on it. But I updated
to just about all 2.0 cables now. (The exception are some of the
retractable cables I use with my laptop and USB 1.1 devices.)


Mikkel
--

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:42 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org