开云体育

When you give an absolute in that "it just works" and ignore hardware issues, that is faulty reasoning. The process fails and you cannot get the process to complete properly
Stop being a cocky ass

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 8:36 AM Jeff Palmer via groups.io <jeff@...> wrote:

"but the issue becomes, if the hardware has an issue,"

Thank you for confirming my point. It's not the disk image, or the
process by which the image is written. It's another (and unrelated)
cause.
Again, I stand by the facts I've presented.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 11:30 AM N5XMT <dacooley@...> wrote:

Jeff,
RELAX. Just because you have not run across something doesn't mean it never happens. That is also an anecdotal observation. Just because someone eats 20 greasy hamburgers a day and lives to be 120 doesn't mean everyone will. Computers work in absolutes, yes, but the issue becomes, if the hardware has an issue, the computer cannot always force it to perform as designed. I had that issue with Engineers 30+ years ago. They design a circuit, they have you assemble it, it doesn't properly work, both digital and analog. What their book learning doesn't take into account is tolerances of components. Tolerances stack up and now they are outside the "theoretical perfect world". They don't see that, they argue and obviously whoever assembled it is the issue. Memory is the same way. Bulk manufacturing isn't perfect, and the factory format may or may not have properly completed, and there may be an issue that keeps the system from properly accessing the device. Unfortunately, I have seen it MANY times. Windows is the least forgiving OS. You stick a memory card in, or attach a drive, and some issues will make the disk subsystem put the device offline due to some access error. At that point, even from a system utility, the drive cannot be written to or read from. MacOS is probably the 2nd pickiest, and Linux the least. Don't even get me started on DEC's VMS...


On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 7:44 AM Jeff Palmer via groups.io <jeff@...> wrote:

Mark,

I've done nothing but state facts. You've done nothing but personal
attacks ("One day I'll learn enough", "I guess you just haven't seen
enough", blah blah blah)
You've not stated a single fact, or provided any evidence to refute
the facts. You've only provided faulty anecdotal observations.

So, yea.. I guess your 30+ years don't matter, if you're denying
actual facts. Maybe take a moment and learn what a disk image
actually is, does, and doesn't do.

Meanwhile, I'll sit here and wait for your next personal attack, since
you literally will not find anything to refute the *actual* facts
about what a disk image is.

Also, agreed. My audience is elsewhere. My audience is the people
in this group who want to educate themselves. My audience is people
who want to hear facts. My audience is people who would rather things
work. As the saying goes in computer sciences. "Something that is
done wrong, may sometimes work. Something that is done correctly will
always work". Computers don't work on "random" unless specifically
instructed too. there is nothing "random" about the success of
writing a disk image. It's not subject to your OPINION, period.

I await your rebuttal against the facts. But I suspect it'll be more
personal attacks, since you won't be able to refute.



On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 10:26 AM Mark Griffith via groups.io
<mdgriffith2003@...> wrote:

Well, I suppose my 30+ years also means something too? Eh?

I guess you just haven't seen enough yet. My apologies.

Argue away. I'm not listening, so your audience is elsewhere.

Mark


On Tuesday, July 7, 2020, 9:23:46 AM CDT, Jeff Palmer via groups.io <jeff@...> wrote:


OK, Now I am trying to argue.

There are absolutes in this field. Disk images ARE absolute.
writing them to a disk IS absolute. It overwrites *everything* that
holds any old layout. That is simply a fact. Your observations,
while relevant, are not *accurate*. There is a significant
difference. correlation does NOT equal causation.

30 years as a unix admin, dealing with disk images.. I'm fairly
confident that I have "enough experience" to have learned what a disk
image is, does, and doesn't do.

One time, I bought new shoes. I immediately stubbed my toe while
wearing them. Correlation: new shoes = stubbed toes. Causation: I
wasn't actually paying attention, and kicked something by accident.
Facts are facts man. properly formatted and written disk images work
100% of the time. IF it doesn't, as I mentioned in the last email,
something else was the cause. Period.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 10:07 AM Mark Griffith via groups.io
<mdgriffith2003@...> wrote:

Whatever. You *are* trying to argue and tell me my observations are not relevant to your discussion.

It's unfortunate, that in what some people may call a discussion, it's obvious that one side doesn't want any other opinions to be expressed. That's not a discussion. There are no absolutes in this field. You probably have not yet had enough experience to learn that yet. Keep learning, it will come.

Mark
KD0QYN


On Tuesday, July 7, 2020, 8:54:49 AM CDT, Jeff Palmer via groups.io <jeff@...> wrote:


Mark,

If you are using a disk image, then no.. the existing partitioning, or
filesystems don't matter. They literally get overwritten. If you've
seen cases where this doesn't seem to be the case, I assure you,
something else is going on. With a disk image, even the boot sectors
of a disk are overwritten.

I'm not trying to argue. But I am trying to clear up misinformation,
because it's become obvious in these threads that.. a little
misinformation leads to a LOT of confusion. So, I'd submit that if
you've "seen it matter" before, you investigate the root cause, as I
assure you, it's not the fault of a disk image "sometimes working,
sometimes not". a properly created disk image, which is also written
properly to a disk will *always* overwrite existing boot sectors,
partition maps, and existing filesystems. Any result *other* than
that, something else was at play. (human error, invalid disk image,
an error with the software writing the image, faulty disk, etc etc the
list goes on and on.)

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 8:52 AM Mark Griffith via groups.io
<mdgriffith2003@...> wrote:

The existence of a partition or filesystem on an SD card *should not* make any difference when writing an image, but it sometimes does. That's why I say NOT to format the card before copying the image. In most cases, I would say it doesn't make a difference, but I have seen some where it has.

Also, I'm hoping all those that are using a giant SD card for the image know to use raspi-config to then expand the filesystem so all of the big SD card is used.

Mark
KD0QYN


On Tuesday, July 7, 2020, 7:32:23 AM CDT, Jeff Palmer via groups.io <jeff@...> wrote:


Interesting.

Since etcher is writing a raw disk image, the existing filesystems,
partitions, or layouts shouldn't matter (or affect writing the image)

For what it's worth, I have HamPi running on a 128gb sd card. I used
etcher, and never had an issue. I hope that helps.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 1:16 AM thegadget techie <gadgetechie@...> wrote:

I did pick up a couple of SanDisk xPros. Seemed the issue may have been the factory format - I zapped the 2nd on w/ xFat (not FAT32) and no hitch w/ Etcher. So maybe that's the issue. Also on MacPro (yeah yeah I'm 25+ yrs *nix guy). I dd'd the 1st SDCard (wiped block 0 & 100) and the PI imager did all the magic - so long story short - not really sure of the issue - but both 128Gb's running like a charm. Now onto USB boot on Pi4....

Thanks all for replies.

On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 5:50 AM John Nicholas <stnick@...> wrote:

Ditto on San Disc. I found that out with discs from my Infrared Imager at work.

JN

On Jul 5, 2020, at 3:24 AM, Roger Reeves M0ROJ <m0roj@...> wrote:

It’s all down to the quality of the SD card. A recommendation is the SanDisk Extreme Pro, whatever the size.

Roger M0ROJ

--
Jeff Palmer
Palmer IT Consulting, LLC.

--
Jeff Palmer
Palmer IT Consulting, LLC.

--
Jeff Palmer
Palmer IT Consulting, LLC.

--
Jeff Palmer
Palmer IT Consulting, LLC.

--
Jeff Palmer
Palmer IT Consulting, LLC.