Exabyte 8500C, Solaris 2.6 and dd

Exabyte 8500C, Solaris 2.6 and dd

Post by Kevin O'Brie » Tue, 23 Feb 1999 04:00:00



Hi All -

Ever since upgrading from Solaris 2.5 to Solaris 2.6 on an Ultra 1/170,
I've been having a problem using "dd" to write to our 8500C tape drive.
When I try, I get:

Quote:> dd if=sio.txt of=/dev/rmt/0un

write: Invalid argument
1+0 records in
1+0 records out

However, "tar"'s to and from the tape drive will work fine.  Again,
under Solaris 2.5, no such problem occurred.

Sun support said to contact Exabyte.  Exabyte sent out a firmware
upgrade (FECODE version 8CC-0730), which I installed on the drive. It
made absolutely no difference.  Since the drive isn't under maintenance,
any more queries to Exabyte will be met with a hefty charge, and Sun
keeps pointing the finger at Exabyte.

Has anyone encountered a similar problem with an 8500C and solaris 2.6?

Email would be appreciated, as I don't read this newsgroup a whole lot.
Thanks much in advance.

Kevin O'Brien

 
 
 

Exabyte 8500C, Solaris 2.6 and dd

Post by Jonathan Sturge » Tue, 02 Mar 1999 04:00:00



> Ever since upgrading from Solaris 2.5 to Solaris 2.6 on an Ultra 1/170,
> I've been having a problem using "dd" to write to our 8500C tape drive.
> When I try, I get:

> > dd if=sio.txt of=/dev/rmt/0un
> write: Invalid argument
> 1+0 records in
> 1+0 records out

> However, "tar"'s to and from the tape drive will work fine.  Again,
> under Solaris 2.5, no such problem occurred.

Hi Kevin,
The 8500C is not supported in Solaris 2.6 out-of-the-box.  It wasn't in 2.5
either... but someone probably made the modifications to 2.5 that you
weren't aware of.

I'm surprised that "tar" works to the drive.  It sounds like you have a
problem with the /dev/rmt/0un device somehow.  Actually, I wonder if
/dev/rmt/0un is still a device file... it sounds possible that it's been
over-written and made a regular file.  Anyhow, the following will give you
"proper" 8500C support:

All you probably have to do is *carefully* edit the /kernel/drv/st.conf
file.  Make a backup copy first!!  Uncomment the lines that begin with
"tape-config-list", "EXABYTE EXB8500C", and "EXB-850X".  If the 8500C is
the *only* tape drive in the tape-config-list, make sure the "EXABYTE
EXB8500C" line is terminated with a semicolon, not a comma.  If you are not
comfortable with this modification, don't attempt it.

After making the above modifications, delete every file in the /dev/rmt
directory, and do a reconfigure boot of your system.

Test the functionality of the /dev/rmt/0un device file -- before and after
the above mods -- by loading a tape, and issuing the 'mt -f /dev/rmt/0un
status' command.  You should not get an error if things are OK.

good luck,
Jonathan

 
 
 

1. Exabyte 8500C woes in SOlaris 2.3

I have an Exabyte 8500C that works fine when attached to a SunOS 4.1
machine. When I attach it to a Solaris 2.3 machine, I cannot read a tape I
could previously read with the same drive on the 4.1 machine (the tape must
be in a compressed format).

Does one have to do anything special to get Solaris tape drivers to read
8500C tapes properly? It seems (from <sys/mtio.h>) that Solaris knows only
the 8200 and 8500 by default, so I would understand that Solaris, by default,
would not know how to specify that one is writing in compressed mode.

In SunOS 4.1, one modified the /usr/sys/scsi/targets/st_conf.c file to
describe tape driver characteristics. In Solaris, one modifies
/kernel/drv/st.conf. I tried to specify the 8500C characteristics using the
st_conf.h 8500C entry as a guide. These are the values I have:

vendor string = "EXABYTE EXB8500C"
flags         = ST_VARIABLE | ST_BSF | ST_BSR | ST_LONG_ERASE
density codes= 0x14, 0x15, 0x90, 0x8C

The Solaris st.conf entry requires a type value (from mtio.h), and I don't
know whether to specify MT_ISEXB8500 or MT_IS8MM for the 8500C.

When I modified the st.conf file and rebooted, I could read low and hi
density tapes under Solaris, but not compressed ones.

Has anyone else had to get an 8500C working under Solaris? How was it done?
Does it make a difference to reading if the tape is accessed via the
different device names that specifify the densities (e.g. /dev/rmt/0ln,
0lbn, 0hn, 0hbn, 0cn, 0cbn)? My understanding is that is does not, and the
drive itself overides the ``requested'' density with that of the actual data
on the tape.

Wondering,
Ray Blaak

2. bsd_comp and/or ppp_deflate

3. Exabyte 8500C and Solaris 2.x

4. Q: dns resolves hosts in a sub domain but won't resolve the gateway to the subdomain

5. Exabyte 8500c unusable with Solaris 2.3

6. Help: 3Com Etherlink III ISA (3C509b) and RedHat 4.1

7. Exabyte 8500C on Solaris 2.2?

8. Basic DNS Problem (I think) Connecting Linux (Redhat 6.1) to the Internet

9. does Solaris support Exabyte 8500C (10 GB) tape drives?

10. Exabyte 8500c tapes from SunOS 4.1.3 -> Solaris 2.4

11. variable block mode with Exabyte 8500C under Solaris 2.4 doesn't work

12. Solaris 2.4 - Exabyte 8500C Tape Drive

13. Exabyte 230D Tape Library Problem w/Networker 5.2.1 (Solaris 2.6)