On Friday 24 January 2003 15:19, Joshua Baker-LePain wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 at 2:44pm, Gene Heskett wrote
>
>> speaking) drive.  I'm noteing that Martins drive claimed it
>> needed a 545 kilobyte filemark.  That, to me with zero
>> experience with either drive, still seems highly excessive.
>
>Well, given that tapetype reported a 5577 kbytes filemark for by
> brand new AIT3 drive...

Duh! 5.5 megs for a filemark? Maybe, but thats a ridiculous amount 
of overhead IMO.  I wonder if tapetype has a (heaven forbid) bug?

-- 
Cheers, Gene
AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M
Athlon1600XP@1400mhz  512M
99.22% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly