Subject: [os2genau_digest] No. 835
From: Digest <deadmail>
To: "OS/2GenAu Digest"<deadmail>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 00:01:02 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600

**************************************************
Tuesday 13 April 2004
 Number  835
**************************************************

Subjects for today
 
1  Re:  Win XP reqs : Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
2  Re:  Win XP reqs : Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
3  Re:  ot: MM or SD cards ? : Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
4  Re:  usb memory card support : Mark Dodel" <madodel at ptdprolog dot net>
5  Re:  ot: MM or SD cards ? : voytek at sbt dot net dot au
6  Re:  Mozilla problem : Robert Traynor  (BobT)" <rtraynor at optusnet dot com dot au>
7  Re:  Broadband : Michael Barrow" <thebarrows at iinet dot net dot au>
8  Re:  Win XP reqs : Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
9   Open Office 1.1.1 for OS/2 : Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
10  Re:  Open Office 1.1.1 for OS/2 : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
11  Re:  Open Office 1.1.1 for OS/2 : David Shearer" <dshe5874 at bigpond dot net dot au>
12  Re:  Win XP reqs : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
13   Sticky : freiherr at earthlink dot net
14  Re:  Sticky : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>

**= Email   1 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 07:06:39 +1000
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Win XP reqs

Mike O'Connor wrote:

>
>
> Hi Ed,
>
> Looking at your previously furnished LVM output, I think the problem is
> that in that extended partition, it can't see the FAT16 drive E:, M$ has
> a problem that's well documented with logical drives [of FS types that
> it *accepts*] not being recognised when preceded by non-accepted FS
> types.  I don't have [didn't keep] the relevant references, but there
> have been many, which is one reason for advising non-compatibility
> partitions all be placed at the *end* of the extended partition - which
> is probably why LVM has *end* of freespace as default selection on creation.
>
> Note this condition applied prior to the advent of LVM also.
>

>
> Thanks Mike, that's worth a try - I can either remove completely or convert the FAT Drive.

Cheers/2

Ed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   2 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 07:12:31 +1000
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Win XP reqs

Thanks Kris and Chris,

  Yes I knew about the 1024 restriction, that's why I move everything around to make a
2GB partition at the front of the drive for XP (which would become C in the XP world).
However XP install still complained - I think Mike has found the problem, that XP
doesn't like *ANY* partitions that it recognises (eg FAT) above this 1024 boundry,
even though it's not going to use them.

Cheers/2

Ed.

Kris Steenhaut wrote:

> Chris Graham [WarpSpeed] wrote:
>
> >Technically, ALL boot partitions must Start and End in the first 1024
> >cylinders.
> >
> >
> >
> allow me to correct:
> "WINDOWS XP bootpartition must start and end in the first 1024
> cylinders; on top of that, all other Windies must boot from C: ."
>
> --
> Groeten uit Gent,
>
>    Kris
>

>  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   3 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 07:17:04 +1000
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  ot: MM or SD cards ?

Hi Voytek,

  I think you mean SD or MMC cards ?  Correct I couldn't get my combined USB memory
key / SD+MMC card reader to work in card reader mode on OS/2. That doesn't mean others
wont work though. I'm lucky that I can connect and read the dat directly from my
digital camera (either from the internal memory or the SD card).

  MMC cards tend to be about 10% cheaper than SD cards although SD cards are easier to
get. Apart from that I don't know aht the differences are.

Cheers/2

Ed.

voytek at sbt dot net dot au wrote:

> I have a new Palm which apprently can take either SD or MM cards, what the
> difference, which ones should I buy, sd or mm ?
>
> also, which card readers works/doesn't work with OS/2, (more) feedback sought
>
> Ed, if I recall, your DSE reader had problems ?
>
> Voytek

>  
> ===========================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   4 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 12 Apr 2004 19:43:26 -0300
From:  "Mark Dodel" <madodel at ptdprolog dot net>
Subject:  Re:  usb memory card support

In <0007942850.0000YMCR at mail.>, on 03/24/04 at 10:12 AM,
   "Mark Dodel" <madodel at ptdprolog dot net> said:

>>Ed,
>>pls post any findings

>>I'm about to get a new Palm, that takes SD and MMC cards, I presume, I
>>can backup to card, then, save to PC

As a followup to this, Brad Barclay has posted some source for an OS/2 USB
Java class to use with his JSyncManager for interfacing Palm devices to
OS/2 via USB.  I have not had a chance to look at this yet.  I just bought
a serial cradle for my Garmin iQue, and plan to first get JSyncManager
working with that and then try to compile the USB stuff if no one else
does before that.  JSM can be found at http://www.jsyncmanager dot org

Mark

-- 

 From the eComStation Desktop of: Mark Dodel

 Warpstock 2004, Denver, Colorado, October 21 - 24, 2004  http://www.warpstock dot org

For a choice in the future of personal computing, Join VOICE - http://www.os2voice dot org

  "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself.   That in it's essence, is Fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Message proposing the Monopoly Investigation, 1938 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   5 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 13:06:31 +1000 (EST)
From:  voytek at sbt dot net dot au
Subject:  Re:  ot: MM or SD cards ?

>   I think you mean SD or MMC cards ?  Correct I couldn't get my combined
> USB memory
> key / SD+MMC card reader to work in card reader mode on OS/2. That doesn't
> mean others
> wont work though. I'm lucky that I can connect and read the dat directly
> from my
> digital camera (either from the internal memory or the SD card).
> MMC cards tend to be about 10% cheaper than SD cards although SD cards
> are easier to
> get. Apart from that I don't know aht the differences are.

Ed,

this is what someone else told me:

---------------------------------
voytek at sbt dot net dot au was once rumoured to have said:
> I have a new Palm which apprently can take either SD or MM cards, what the
> difference, which ones should I buy, sd or mm ?

The two are electronically compatible, but SD protocol is a superset of the
MMC protocol resulting in not all SD cards working in MMC-only systems.

The SD protocol is closed to members of the SD group, and it is against the
licensing terms to publish the details of implementation for a SD driver
(aparently).  For this reason, Linux does not support SD without the use of
closed source drivers.  (The only ones I'm aware of are the ones that Sharp
ships on the Zaurus).

MMC OTOH, is fairly well supported.

You're best off getting a MM card if the price difference is negligable since
you can read them in pretty much anything with a MMC/SD reader.
----------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
**= Email   6 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:34:47 +1000
From:  "Robert Traynor  (BobT)" <rtraynor at optusnet dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Mozilla problem

Hi Alan,

Try updating your Kernal files with the eCS MT or if Warp4 grab the latest 
kernals off os2site dot com.

Regards,
Robert Traynor (BobT).
13 April 2004   15:34

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 20:38:02 +1000 (AEST), Alan Duval wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I spoke too soon.  Went to open Mozilla 1.4 again and the system crashed and showed this error message
> 
> Exception in module: os2KRNL
> TRAP 000e	ERRCD = 0000	   ERACC = ****	    ERLIM = ********
> EAX = 0008b505	EBX = 00000344	ECX = 00687c3c	EDX = 00000000
> ESI = 00000000	   EDI = f9d02d1a	EBP = 00004f8e	    FLG = 00012207	
> CS:EIP = 0168:fff48842		CSACC = c09b		CSLIM = ffffffff
> SS:ESP = 003000004f6a		SSACC = 1097		SSLIM = 0000429f
> DS = 0160	DSACC = c093		DSLIM = ffffffff		CR0 = 8001001b
> ES = 0160	ESACC = c093		ESLIM = ffffffff		CR2 = 00000000
> FS = 03c0	FSACC = 0093		FSLIM = ********
> 
> The system detected an internal processing error at 
> location	##0168:fff1eb6b  -  000e:cb6b.
> 60000, 9084
> 
> 07860686
> Internal revision   14.093_W4
> 
> Rebooted and this time opened Mozilla successfully.
> 
> Haven't a clue what the error message means or what I should do. Could someone please enlighten me?
> 
> 
> Regards
> Alan Duval

   ,-._|\       Robert Traynor        (BobT)
 /  Oz  \      email            rtraynor at removeme.optusnet dot com dot au
 \_,--.x/ 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   7 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 19:06:39 GMT
From:  "Michael Barrow" <thebarrows at iinet dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Broadband

> On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 20:49:47 +1000, Dennis J. Nolan wrote:
> > Hi all
> > I'm seeking advice
> > 
> > I think it is time for me to go ADSL

Large SNIP

Been busy so I have only joined the thread now.
I run ADSL from iinet with the earlier version of the netcomm 1300 with only
one port.
Setup is done via a web page that you browse to using the default IP address
that the modem comes with.
You then enter the default login/password (don't forget to change all that) and
you have a simple page to add the few values needed.
If you already run a network then most of the rest of the work is done.
Consideration will need to be given to the IP addresses you use in your own
network and I would reccommend using a correct private network series like the
192, (there are I think two other sets), but 192 is used by many of the modems
out of the box.
If you would like more info Dennis on my setup let me know and I'll take you
though it off list.
Regards,

Michael
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   8 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:49:43 +1000
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Win XP reqs

Mike O'Connor wrote:

> Hi Eric,
> Basically M$ doesn't like to boot from anything other than BIOS disk 80H
> - the first hard-disk.  If you have a FAT16/32/NTFS Primary partition on
> the first hard disk, you can install NT/W2K/XP on the second hard-disk
> [mainly], but it still boots *through* that FAT16/32/NTFS  C: partition.
> If you don't have a FAT16/32/NTFS primary on first disk , e.g.
> OS2-eCS+LINUX|NETWARE, it won't install on the second disk. Things can
> be "fudged" however, but it takes a lot of playing around to get it to work.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mike

Hi Mike,

   One thing I have seen is that LVM appears to reference my (only) harddisk as disk number 2 not 1. This could also be something that XP doesn't like possibly.

Cheers/2

Ed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   9 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 21:27:52 +1000
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:   Open Office 1.1.1 for OS/2

It's arrived !

Stuffed into my mailbox by our friendly postman in such a
way that it was difficult to get out, I was expecting the CD
to be broken but luckily it wasn't.

So I started the install by simply clicking on install.exe
in the root directory of the CD. It then proceeds to check
if the current versions of Innotek fontlib, Innotek Runtime
and Sun Java are installed and if not gives you the option
to install them.

This logic is good, except after each individual install the
flow stops and you have to go back and restart install.exe
again.

Eventually one get to the installation of Open Office
however before this you are prompted from a command mode
window to confirm various install options which appear to be
a repeat of the previous support components.

The command mode windows and the lack of continuity leaves a
feeling that it could be done better but what really is
annoying is several beeps and a simple message at the end of
the install "Installation not complete" - no reasons, simply
not complete !  - But it hasn't actually failed !! a couple
of seconds later after pressing exit, the registration panel
comes up and accepts your registration information.

Well, now everything should be there right ?  No, no folder,
no icons, no nothing !!

Try to run the executable soffice.exe and it gives an
executable error.

So my initial impression of this new product is "less than
perfect" ......

Cheers/2

Ed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   10 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 21:37:32 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Open Office 1.1.1 for OS/2

Ed Durrant wrote:

>It's arrived !
>
>Stuffed into my mailbox by our friendly postman in such a
>way that it was difficult to get out, I was expecting the CD
>to be broken but luckily it wasn't.
>
>So I started the install by simply clicking on install.exe
>in the root directory of the CD. It then proceeds to check
>if the current versions of Innotek fontlib, Innotek Runtime
>and Sun Java are installed and if not gives you the option
>to install them.
>
>This logic is good, except after each individual install the
>flow stops and you have to go back and restart install.exe
>again.
>
>Eventually one get to the installation of Open Office
>however before this you are prompted from a command mode
>window to confirm various install options which appear to be
>a repeat of the previous support components.
>
>The command mode windows and the lack of continuity leaves a
>feeling that it could be done better but what really is
>annoying is several beeps and a simple message at the end of
>the install "Installation not complete" - no reasons, simply
>not complete !  - But it hasn't actually failed !! a couple
>of seconds later after pressing exit, the registration panel
>comes up and accepts your registration information.
>
>Well, now everything should be there right ?  No, no folder,
>no icons, no nothing !!
>
>Try to run the executable soffice.exe and it gives an
>executable error.
>
>So my initial impression of this new product is "less than
>perfect" ......
>
>Cheers/2
>  
>

Ed,

It may be like Object Desktop/Xworkplace etc., that need a 
reboot[desktop restart for XWP - but I always do a reboot instead] to 
actually create all the desktop objects etc.

Have you rebooted since installing?

-- 
Regards,
Mike

Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
[ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments]
[Please use zipped versions of above]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   11 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 21:40:46 +1000
From:  "David Shearer" <dshe5874 at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Open Office 1.1.1 for OS/2

I ordered mine via digital delivery.  It installed fine - you need to reboot once after it updates the runtime I 
recall, then it installed flawlessly - no error messages - i thought it was rather slick. Maybe the CD rom version 
isn't the same as the download version??

So far I quite like OO.

David

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 21:27:52 +1000, Ed Durrant wrote:

>It's arrived !
>
>Stuffed into my mailbox by our friendly postman in such a
>way that it was difficult to get out, I was expecting the CD
>to be broken but luckily it wasn't.
>
>So I started the install by simply clicking on install.exe
>in the root directory of the CD. It then proceeds to check
>if the current versions of Innotek fontlib, Innotek Runtime
>and Sun Java are installed and if not gives you the option
>to install them.
>
>This logic is good, except after each individual install the
>flow stops and you have to go back and restart install.exe
>again.
>
>Eventually one get to the installation of Open Office
>however before this you are prompted from a command mode
>window to confirm various install options which appear to be
>a repeat of the previous support components.
>
>The command mode windows and the lack of continuity leaves a
>feeling that it could be done better but what really is
>annoying is several beeps and a simple message at the end of
>the install "Installation not complete" - no reasons, simply
>not complete !  - But it hasn't actually failed !! a couple
>of seconds later after pressing exit, the registration panel
>comes up and accepts your registration information.
>
>Well, now everything should be there right ?  No, no folder,
>no icons, no nothing !!
>
>Try to run the executable soffice.exe and it gives an
>executable error.
>
>So my initial impression of this new product is "less than
>perfect" ......
>
>Cheers/2
>
>Ed.
>

> 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   12 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 21:54:20 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Win XP reqs

Ed Durrant wrote:

>Mike O'Connor wrote:
>
>>Hi Eric,
>>Basically M$ doesn't like to boot from anything other than BIOS disk 80H
>>- the first hard-disk.  If you have a FAT16/32/NTFS Primary partition on
>>the first hard disk, you can install NT/W2K/XP on the second hard-disk
>>[mainly], but it still boots *through* that FAT16/32/NTFS  C: partition.
>>If you don't have a FAT16/32/NTFS primary on first disk , e.g.
>>OS2-eCS+LINUX|NETWARE, it won't install on the second disk. Things can
>>be "fudged" however, but it takes a lot of playing around to get it to work.
>>
>>--
>>Regards,
>>Mike
>>    
>>
>Hi Mike,
>
>   One thing I have seen is that LVM appears to reference my (only) harddisk as disk number 2 not 1. This could also be something that XP doesn't like possibly.
>
>Cheers/2
>  
>

Hi Ed,

Was that HDU initially set up when it was a slave to another? That would 
explain the numbering!

If you have the Graham Utils [a limited edition came with eCS [both 
issues IIRC]], use diskedit.exe to have a look at the boot-sectors of 
the bootable partitions, or logical HPFS for that matter, as any of 
those can *become* bootable, to check what value shows up there.  Syntax 
is "diskedit -nolock <drive-letter>:" for logical drives, just to 
examine - and if you need to alter values [in HEX is best], use 
"diskedit -nolock -allowwrites <drive-letter>:" If examining the 
physical disk the syntax is "diskedit -nolock  p  #" where #=1 for first 
physical disk, 2 = . . . .". You just open up the partition/volume with 
that commandline, accept the proffered cyl/hd/sec values, and press 
[F11] to get to edit mode, select the "Edit as Boot-sector" and you'll 
have the information laid out for you on screen.

XP, along with *every* other M$ OS definitely doesn't accept booting 
from BIOS-numbered HD 81H [129 decimal], XOSL boot-Loader has a feature 
that lets you fool M$ into thinking it's on HDU 80H, by swapping the 
numbers between physical drives.

HTH

-- 
Regards,
Mike

Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
[ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments]
[Please use zipped versions of above]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   13 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 07:02:24 -0400
From:  freiherr at earthlink dot net
Subject:   Sticky

Does anyone know how to make an application "stickey" across multiple
desktops in eCS 1.1?  This is the same effect as toggling the
"pushpin" gadget in Linux KDE presentations.  I remember reading
somewhere that it can be done, but don't remember how, and didn't save
the details.

Regards, 
Eric Schilke

Copyright (c) 2004.  All rights reserved.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**= Email   14 ==========================**

Date:  Tue, 13 Apr 2004 22:12:34 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Sticky

freiherr at earthlink dot net wrote:

>Does anyone know how to make an application "stickey" across multiple
>desktops in eCS 1.1?  This is the same effect as toggling the
>"pushpin" gadget in Linux KDE presentations.  I remember reading
>somewhere that it can be done, but don't remember how, and didn't save
>the details.
>
>Regards, 
>Eric Schilke
>  
>

Hi Eric,
I use the OD equivalent, but ISTR that you have to go into the SCREEN 
object, ePager tab and you'll find options there on making applications 
sticky

-- 
Regards,
Mike

Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
[ISP blocks *.exe, *.cmd, *.bat, *.reg attachments]
[Please use zipped versions of above]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------