From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jun 21 07:40:06 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id HAA26312
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 21 Jun 1995 07:40:06 -0700
Received: from plains.nodak.edu (tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu [134.129.111.64])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id HAA26306
          ; Wed, 21 Jun 1995 07:40:03 -0700
Received: (from tinguely@localhost) by plains.nodak.edu (8.6.11/8.6.10) id JAA17552; Wed, 21 Jun 1995 09:39:56 -0500
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 09:39:56 -0500
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@plains.nodak.edu>
Message-Id: <199506211439.JAA17552@plains.nodak.edu>
To: hsu@freefall.cdrom.com, rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com
Subject: Re: dump errors
Cc: hackers@freefall.cdrom.com, phk@freefall.cdrom.com
Content-Length: 660
Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>  > I'm dumping just one filesystem, an ufs filesystem.  Fsck reveals no
>  > errors, but the drive itself could be going bad at those sectors.
>  > Fortunately, you see these types of errors too, so it may yet
>  > be a software problem.
>  
>  In either of your cases are theses ufs filesystems larger than 2G bytes?

I was going to ask the same question, because the lseek-s in traverse.c should
not read:
if ((int)lseek(diskfd, ((off_t)blkno << dev_bshift), 0) < 0)

but should read:

if (lseek(diskfd, ((off_t)blkno << dev_bshift), 0)==(off_t) -1)
 
as I stated in bug report 461. I doubt this is the problem because you
would get a lot of lseek errors.