> Can you give me an example where this patch works or an explanation why
> this helps? (If you look at the code, the field
> (STp->buffer)->last_result_fatal is unconditionally set a few lines
> below your suggested change in st_do_scsi to a value returned by
> st_chk_result which does not use the previous value of last_result_fatal.
> There may be something in the code that I can't see but would like to see.
> In the systems I use I don't have any problems in using the tape after an
> error.)
>
> Kai
>
>
You are, of course, correct. This line is now present in 2.0.32, and I
just tried commenting it out. The result: a working tape drive. This
wasn't always the case... Something else has changed, but at least this
line could now come out of 2.0.x. Sorry for the waste of time and
bandwidth.
Jeff Hittman
jhittman@slip.net