Re: odd df results

[Arnt Karlsen <arnt@c2i.net>]

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:35:53 -0600, 
Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote in message 
<[🔎] 1068608153.30969.103.camel@haggis.homelan>:

> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 21:11, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:13:01 -0600, 
> > Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote in message 
> > <[🔎] 1068599581.30969.44.camel@haggis.homelan>:
> > 
> > > On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 17:14, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
> > > > I am getting the following result on my filesystem.  How do I
> > > > correct it?
> > > > 
> > > > # df
> > > > Filesystem           1k-blocks      Used Available Use% Mounted
> > > > on/dev/hda1            -1006130973579         1         0  24% /
> > > > /dev/hda2            -1006139352819         1         0   8%
> > > > /home
> > > 
> > > Woody?  Sarge, what?
> > > 
> > > How big is /dev/hda?
> > 
> > .."not big enough".  I got similar responses on trying to dd a
> > Knoppix iso onto an old 730M disk.  ;-)
> 
> What do you mean?  Did the df(1) give that weird result before or
> after the dd(1)?

..after, the dd failed at about 99.something and df -h owed in the 
Exa range.  ;-)


-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.