From: Digest <deadmail>
To: "OS/2GenAu Digest"<deadmail>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:01:08 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600
Subject: [os2genau_digest] No. 1002
Reply-To: <deadmail>
X-List-Unsubscribe: www.os2site.com/list/

**************************************************
Monday 13 December 2004
 Number  1002
**************************************************

Subjects for today
 
1  Re:  Telstra have fixed Webmail ! : Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
2  Re:  No. 1000 : Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
3  Re:  Telstra have fixed Webmail ! : Ken Laurie" <ken.laurie at graeleah dot com>
4  Re:  No. 1000 : Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
5   New disk problems : Alan Duval" <amoht at ozemail dot com dot au>
6  Re:  New disk problems : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
7  Re:  New disk problems : Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
8  Re:  New disk problems : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
9  Re:  New disk problems : Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
10  Re:  New disk problems : Alan Duval" <amoht at ozemail dot com dot au>
11  Re:  New disk problems : Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
12  Re:  New disk problems : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:22:59 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  Telstra have fixed Webmail !



"Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" wrote:

> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:08:50 +1100, Ed Durrant wrote:
>
> >Hi All,
> >
> >  Good news - Telstra have fixed access to their Webmail
> >system, which from earlier this week was only accessible
> >from Microsoft IE browser is now once more fully accessible
> >from IBM Web Browser, Mozilla and Opera/2 !!
> >
> >  I haven't as yet had a reply to my complaint however it
> >seems my complaint, along with I suspect a lot of other
> >people's have moved them into action.
> >
> >  Good on TELSTRA !
>
> Not really, they should not have been able to have put it into production
> to start with.
>
> -Chris
>

Agreed, but in the current IT environment, there's not the attitude that was there
with mainframe systems - changes DO get put in without being fully tested by lots of
companies. The majority of "IT Professionals" today ONLY know the Microsoft platforms.
Talk to them about Midrange or mainframe equipment needs or connectivity thereto and
you just get an insulting blank expression back !  So it no longer surprises me that
these errors occur.

What I do congratulate Telstra on it that this enormous machine, actually fixed the
problem in a reasonable time - I guess there must be someone in the organisation with
"a bit of nouse" (ie knows what he or she is doing) !

Cheers/2

Ed.

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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:24:13 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at bigpond dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  No. 1000

I heartily second what Kev has said - thanks and well done Ian !

Cheers/2

Ed.

Kev wrote:

> Hi Ian
>
> Congratulations on running the best, friendliest, most helpful and most
> informative eCS - OS/2 list in Oz.  At least another 1000 to go.
>
> Cheers
> Kev Downes
>
> Ian Manners wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 00:01:09 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600, Digest wrote:
> >
> >>**************************************************
> >>Saturday 11 December 2004
> >> Number  1000
> >>**************************************************
> >>
> >>Subjects for today
> >
> >
> > Whaho, Number 1000 ! = 1000 days of posting on this list,
> > This number doesnt include days that there were no postings to the list.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Ian Manners
> > http://www.os2site dot com/
> >
> > Help stamp out, eliminate and abolish redundancy!
> 
> >  
> 
> >
> >
> >

>  


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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:20:20 +0000
From:  "Ken Laurie" <ken.laurie at graeleah dot com>
Subject:  Re:  Telstra have fixed Webmail !

Hi Kris

I was being sarcastic towards Telstra. They seem to take this sort of attitude towards their customers, that windows and ie are the only products anybody uses, so thats all they do their testing with.

To me it's no more difficult to setup the environment according to international standards than to set it up according to M$ standards. The trouble here is that they tend to have M$centric people working for them who don't or won't accept that there are a lot, and hopefully growing, number of people out there who don't use M$ products.

regards
Ken

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:49:27 +0100, kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl wrote:

>
>
>Ken Laurie schreef:
>
>> Hi Chris
>>
>> Now come on. Telstra know that the only people the surf the web and 
>> send and receive email use windows and iexploder. Telstra can't be 
>> expected to set up their environment so that any web browser or mail 
>> reader can work.
>
>Yes they can be expected that. For the good reason they are expected to 
>comply to html and javascript standards.
>
>The reason why only the I E could see the Telstra pages was because 
>there were errors and errors in their scripts, at which the IE _failed_ 
>to react properly. And that is exactly one of the reasons why the IE is 
>the most unsafe of programs you can think of.
>
>
>-- 
>Groeten uit Gent,
>
>   Kris
>

> 

>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:04:28 +1100 (EST)
From:  "Voytek Eymont" <voytek at sbt dot net dot au>
Subject:  Re:  No. 1000


Ed Durrant said:
> I heartily second what Kev has said - thanks and well done Ian !
>
> Cheers/2
>
> Ed.
>
> Kev wrote:
>
>> Hi Ian
>>
>> Congratulations on running the best, friendliest, most helpful and most
>> informative eCS - OS/2 list in Oz.  At least another 1000 to go.

so do I, well done Ian.

however, I really wish that the users of this list exhibited a little bit
of nettiquette and, perhaps, common sense.

time and time and time again, people here re-quote ad nausem entire 10 or
more deep thread, including, 10 or more re-subscribe notices , etc, etc.

surely it's not that difficult to drag a mouse across superflous text and
nudge the del key ?


-- 
Voytek
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
**= Email   5 ==========================**

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:34:06 +1100 (AEDT)
From:  "Alan Duval" <amoht at ozemail dot com dot au>
Subject:   New disk problems

Hi everyone,

My primary hard disk failed last week so had a new one installed at the local computer shop. The technician 
said he was able to transfer my files from the old 10G disk to the new 40G disk. However the partitions were 
larger than previously and thus eCS was in a partition beyond the 1024 cylinder barrier and wouldn't boot. 
Thus I had to use Partition Magic to resize the partitions but it encountered too many errors. Hence I deleted 
a couple of partitions and reformed them to the right size and used Drive Image to restore the contents from 
images on another drive. Unfortunately these images were old.  I needed  to update data in my data partitions 
so I had a go at transfering data from my old disk to the new partitions after getting it going by a few quick 
rotary motions. Fortunately this worked. I've now updated all my images .

Now my second hard drive seems on the verge of failing but is working after a few quick flicks. Hence I'm 
thinking of making new partitions in the free space after the 1024 limit on the new Primary hard disk and 
transfering the data there before installing a new hard drive and either transfering my backup partitions from 
my third disk to it or manually shifting the third drive to the second drive position and using the new third drive 
to install Linux.

My questions:

1. Does all of my eCS partition have to be under the 1024 cylinder limit or can it span this limit as long as it 
starts before the 1024 cylinder ? My reason for this question is that I would like to make my WIN95 partition 
larger as it has little free space.

2. If I do the above I believe I will have to run LVM to mark the partitions so that eCS can be booted and 
recognize the new partitions. Can this be done by running the eCS 1.1 installation CD ? I also have DFSee so 
could it be used for the same purpose ?

Regards,

Alan Duval

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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:40:02 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  New disk problems

Alan Duval wrote:

>Hi everyone,
>
>My primary hard disk failed last week so had a new one installed at the local computer shop. The technician said he was able to transfer my files from the old 10G disk to the new 40G disk. However the partitions were 
>larger than previously and thus eCS was in a partition beyond the 1024 cylinder barrier and wouldn't boot. 
>Thus I had to use Partition Magic to resize the partitions but it encountered too many errors. Hence I deleted a couple of partitions and reformed them to the right size and used Drive Image to restore the contents from images on another drive. Unfortunately these images were old.  I needed  to update data in my data partitions so I had a go at transfering data from my old disk to the new partitions after getting it going by a few quick rotary motions. Fortunately this worked. I've now updated all my images .
>
>Now my second hard drive seems on the verge of failing but is working after a few quick flicks. Hence I'm thinking of making new partitions in the free space after the 1024 limit on the new Primary hard disk and transfering the data there before installing a new hard drive and either transfering my backup partitions from my third disk to it or manually shifting the third drive to the second drive position and using the new third drive to install Linux.
>
>My questions:
>
>1. Does all of my eCS partition have to be under the 1024 cylinder limit or can it span this limit as long as it starts before the 1024 cylinder ? My reason for this question is that I would like to make my WIN95 partition 
>larger as it has little free space.
>
>2. If I do the above I believe I will have to run LVM to mark the partitions so that eCS can be booted and recognize the new partitions. Can this be done by running the eCS 1.1 installation CD ? I also have DFSee so 
>could it be used for the same purpose ?
>
>Regards,
>
>Alan Duval
>  
>

Hi Alan,
I don't have any problems here booting eCS 1.1/MCP2 from beyond cylinder 
1024 on a year 2000 motherboard - the limitation for eCS only exists if 
the BIOS has a limitation of 1024 cylinders for bootability.

Can you get a BIOS update to allow you to overcome the problem?

HTH

-- 
Regards,
Mike

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

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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:56:17 +0100
From:  Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
Subject:  Re:  New disk problems



Mike O'Connor schreef:

>
> Hi Alan,
> I don't have any problems here booting eCS 1.1/MCP2

But you are the bright guy of course.

> from beyond cylinder 1024 on a year 2000 motherboard - the limitation 
> for eCS only exists if the BIOS has a limitation of 1024 cylinders for 
> bootability.
>
Wrong. There was a bug in eCS1.1 that triggered an undue error message 
and halt to the install at brand new systems such as TP R40-41 TP R-50 
etc... The error message was being byond "the 1024 cylinder" boundery.
The bug had been agknowledged rather silently, to silenced to be good, 
but that is quite another matter.
The bad thing was/is for people having encountered there was/is no way 
out other than to install byond the 1024 boundery....

> Can you get a BIOS update to allow you to overcome the problem?
>
.... and the only real way out for this people is to upgrade to eCS 1.2, 
as the bug has been fixed in the new version.

Do ask Alex (Tayler).


-- 
Groeten uit Gent,

   Kris

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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:19:24 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  New disk problems

Kris Steenhaut wrote:

> Mike O'Connor schreef:
>
>> Hi Alan,
>> I don't have any problems here booting eCS 1.1/MCP2
>
> But you are the bright guy of course.
>
>> from beyond cylinder 1024 on a year 2000 motherboard - the limitation 
>> for eCS only exists if the BIOS has a limitation of 1024 cylinders 
>> for bootability.
>
> Wrong. There was a bug in eCS1.1 that triggered an undue error message 
> and halt to the install at brand new systems such as TP R40-41 TP R-50 
> etc... The error message was being byond "the 1024 cylinder" boundery.
> The bug had been agknowledged rather silently, to silenced to be good, 
> but that is quite another matter.
> The bad thing was/is for people having encountered there was/is no way 
> out other than to install byond the 1024 boundery....
>
>> Can you get a BIOS update to allow you to overcome the problem?
>
> ... and the only real way out for this people is to upgrade to eCS 
> 1.2, as the bug has been fixed in the new version.
>
> Do ask Alex (Tayler).  [TPs are the particular problem]
>
>

Kris,
I've read all the discussions as they occurred - but Alan didn't say 
anything about Laptops, which appear to be the only systems affected by 
that particular "bug".  Note I initially installed eCS 1.0 GA completely 
beyond cyl 1024 on that MSI motherboard machine.

-- 
Regards,
Mike

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

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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:02:57 +0100
From:  Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
Subject:  Re:  New disk problems



Mike O'Connor schreef:

>
> Kris,
> I've read all the discussions as they occurred - but Alan didn't say 
> anything about Laptops,

I have encountered the bug as well on plain PC-systems. Gave the TP just 
as an example. Alex told me it had something to to with the omission of 
the VCU utility in eCS1.1 but nor he nor Mensys nor SS did care to 
elaborate on the matter.

> which appear to be the only systems affected by that particular 
> "bug".  Note I initially installed eCS 1.0 GA completely beyond cyl 
> 1024 on that MSI motherboard machine.
>
It is/was a particular eCS1.1 bug. Why the hell do I have always to 
repeat myself?

-- 
Groeten uit Gent,

   Kris

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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:14:09 +1100 (AEDT)
From:  "Alan Duval" <amoht at ozemail dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  New disk problems

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:40:02 +1000, Mike O'Connor wrote:

>>My questions:
>>
>>1. Does all of my eCS partition have to be under the 1024 cylinder limit or can it span this limit as long as it 
starts before the 1024 cylinder ? My reason for this question is that I would like to make my WIN95 partition 
>>larger as it has little free space.
>>
>>2. If I do the above I believe I will have to run LVM to mark the partitions so that eCS can be booted and 
recognize the new partitions. Can this be done by running the eCS 1.1 installation CD ? I also have DFSee so 
>>could it be used for the same purpose ?
>>
>
>Hi Alan,
>I don't have any problems here booting eCS 1.1/MCP2 from beyond cylinder 
>1024 on a year 2000 motherboard - the limitation for eCS only exists if 
>the BIOS has a limitation of 1024 cylinders for bootability.
>
>Can you get a BIOS update to allow you to overcome the problem?
>

Hi Mike,

Then can eCS 1.1 straddle the 1024 cylinder, or does it need to be either in front of or beyond it?

Can you comment on Question 2 also?


Regards,

Alan

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

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:33:36 +0100
From:  Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut at hccnet.nl>
Subject:  Re:  New disk problems



Alan Duval schreef:

>>Can you get a BIOS update to allow you to overcome the problem?
>>
>>    
>>
>
>Hi Mike,
>
>Then can eCS 1.1 straddle the 1024 cylinder, or does it need to be either in front of or beyond it?
>
>  
>
On some systems it did. It did on quite a few systems I'd encountered. 
And as SS and C° prefered to keep the blind eye on the problem, I only 
can tell Alex Tayler spotted the problem and provided the solution for 
eCS 1.2

If you want to know more, you'll have to contact him personally I'm afraid.

-- 
Groeten uit Gent,

   Kris

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

Date:  Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:40:07 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at dodo dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  New disk problems

Alan Duval wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 20:40:02 +1000, Mike O'Connor wrote:
>
>>>My questions:
>>>
>>>1. Does all of my eCS partition have to be under the 1024 cylinder limit or can it span this limit as long as it starts before the 1024 cylinder ? My reason for this question is that I would like to make my WIN95 partition larger as it has little free space.
>>>      
>>>
>>>2. If I do the above I believe I will have to run LVM to mark the partitions so that eCS can be booted and recognize the new partitions. Can this be done by running the eCS 1.1 installation CD ? I also have DFSee so could it be used for the same purpose ?
>>>
>> Hi Alan,
>>
>>I don't have any problems here booting eCS 1.1/MCP2 from beyond cylinder 
>>1024 on a year 2000 motherboard - the limitation for eCS only exists if 
>>the BIOS has a limitation of 1024 cylinders for bootability.
>>
>>Can you get a BIOS update to allow you to overcome the problem?
>>
>
>Hi Mike,
>
>Then can eCS 1.1 straddle the 1024 cylinder, or does it need to be either in front of or beyond it?
>
>Can you comment on Question 2 also?
>
>Regards,
>
Hi Alan,
eCS 1.1 can do all of the above, at least here, and my hardware is 
pretty ancient relative to many others.
I jumped in there a bit quickly and omitted to ask what your setup 
actually was on the former 10GB drive, whether you were using IBM BM or 
another Boot Manager, whether the eCS partition was primary or logical, 
if the disks are SCSI or EIDE etc.

It would be a lot easier to analyse your disk situation if you posted 
here the output from "lvm /query:all >a:\duval.lvm", after  booting from 
the eCS 1.1 CD#1, selecting "command-line" vice "GUI-instal" on the 
second page of "boot with own values", along with the above information, 
preferably with the old disk mounted as slave.

-- 
Regards,
Mike

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

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

