CompuServe Thread

#amiga hard drives

12 messages in this thread
#132613From: Dale SchlottJun 30, 1988 3:53 PM
Steve, I had a problem with prep accessing the wrong drive. Notified Andy of this about 2 months ago. The new hddisk fixed the problem. Also if you look at the new driver with NewZap you will notice a reference to a RomBoot.device. The upcoming hd boot capability is probably going to require this release of hddisk. BTW a little off subject but! Is there a way to disable ctl-p on the CIS end. Almost every day, when dumping the msg's here I'm getting sent back to the menus. The strange thing is the control P will appear in the middle of a word without any other line noise around it. Wouldn't mind so much if the high-msg pointer was updated. Dale
#132714From: griffith kadnierJul 1, 1988 5:19 AM
I too have the latest version (HD34_4) of the HDdisk.device driver and am trying to keep from tearing the hair I still have off when, at random times, (usually while copying or using a diskutil) the hash tables will be trashed or a WHOLE sub-directory dis-appears (AND I MEAD/N DIS!). What could be causing this? Andy, have you any sugesstions(sic)? Using a 5 meg 2000 w/A2090 and 2 ST506/412 drives (one k/ now serves ONLY as a backup for the other since I can't r/ trust these things….Using a Miniscribe 3650 as DH0: and a Seagate 125-3 1/2" as DH1: HELP!!! PLEASE!!! NO MORE @@@@!!##$$$$ 2-5 hour backups because of a silly device driver or some such fault….PLLLLEEEAAASSEE? Griffith
#132727From: Dale SchlottJul 1, 1988 3:11 PM
Griffith, I haven't had any problems with the new driver. I'm using SCSI drives thou. There is a possibility that you have found a bug that affects your particular setup. (ie. ST-506 or some drive incompatibility) I had a problem with the old hddisk. The problem only occurred when using multiple Miniscribe 8425s drives. (Prep would always access the first unit in the string.) I had to rip the 2000 apart and re-address the drives just to prep the second drive. I would suggest going back to the old driver & leaving Andy some EMail detailing your problems. The new driver doesn't seem to be important at this time anyway. It's not faster and does not offer any enhancements that I can find. I think it's main purpose is ADos 1.3 romboot. Andy seems to be good about these things. He'll listen, check it out, and get back too you. At least he did with my problem. Dale
#132838From: griffith kadnierJul 2, 1988 6:28 AM
Thanks, Dale, for the info….it may be that the ST506 side is the only thing this bug BITES, but it is definitely there and I'll follow your suggestions about telling Andy. I did switch back to the older driver and all buggy operation has ceased (I think!) so it's definitely going to have to be resolved if not only for me., but for all the others that will sooner or later run into the problem…thanks again.. Griffith
#132742From: John DraperJul 1, 1988 6:57 PM
Griffith, I am running a 2000 with 5.5 megs on memory, a 2090, and two ST506 drives, with none of the problems you mention. i think the driver is fine, and would look elsewhere for a problem. What sort of software are you running? -larry
#132840From: griffith kadnierJul 2, 1988 6:41 AM
Weellll???…..I don't know what is happening right now in terms of the driver that was released here (HD34_4), but when I changed back to the older driver, the crashes and wierd behaviour stopped! (to the best of my knowledge right now) I don't use very esoteric software, am an EE and MSCS, so I think I have a basici c grip on what to do at startup (setting stack, properly setting up background tasks, etc.) The specific piece of software I was running into the most trouble with is DISK MECHANIC by Lake Forest Logic. Eric(k) from Lake Forest has been as helpful as could be expected considering I am in Seattle and LFL is in Illin ois. His sugesstion was to change back to the older driver and indeed that did help, but it's too early to tell whether it cured the situation. He's also checking with C= to see what they did to the new driver's structure vis-a-vis his software. Other than that, I have run into wierd copying problems like LOSING entire directories doing a COPY A// (COPY DH0: DH1: ALL {Quiet}) which should show NO problems at ANY time….I dont(sic) get into multu/i-tasking so I would guess no problem there….any other Ideas would be appreciated….Thanks, Griffith
#132928From: John DraperJul 2, 1988 10:34 PM
Griffith, I'm not familiar with DISK MECHANIC, though it does sound interesting. I can certainly understand a program of that name having problems if the author made any unwarranted assumptions about the driver, but the other problems are harder to figure out. Interstingly enough, I just had a strange thing happen today, when a file sort of 'disappeared'. I could still access it, but it showed up in neither LIST not DIR. I used Sectorama to track it down, and it was second place in a hash chain, with the first entry being a corrupt one. I think I'll play it safe and go back to the older driver too. It's also faster. -larry
#132968From: griffith kadnierJul 3, 1988 5:18 AM
YES! Larry, youve(sic) just experienced the same kind of problem I had. I got into one drive with Sectorama and found the same thing when a program would not DIR or LIST for me. Something strange going on inside that driver! I wish C= would be more forth-coming and open in release of the source code ala IBM for HDdisk.device., then we could REALLY see what was going on. Why have they not done this? It only works with the A2090 so I can't see where they would lose money or anything….IBM is the giant in PC's BECAUSE they released source with the computers and made it an open system. Interestingly, now that they are NOT releasing source on the PS/2 line, their market share has dropped Lets all encourage the release of source for these things that depend upon specific hardware (where the manf. would not lose anything at any rate)… Are you listening C=???????????? good luck Larry, Griffith
#133006From: Bob RakoskyJul 3, 1988 12:05 PM
The idea of releasing source is an interesting one, but one that gets pretty scary in terms of providing support for the software. How can I provide support for software that you, the user, has modified? I can hear it now, "the change I made can't possibly have any relationship to the problem I'm experiencing". Now don't take this as a personal attack, cause it isn't meant that way. Now, if one were to purchase software on an "as is" basis, then releasing the source would be less of a problem, since the buyer is on his/her own for support anyway. That's just not the way things work.
#133049From: John DraperJul 3, 1988 5:22 PM
You have a point about supporting software that has been modified, but there is always the position that a modified version is not supported, period. It is easy enough to check that the person is talking about the original, and to just plain refuse to listen if it isn't the released version. One side benefit of this would be that CBM could use ideas or bug fixes incorporated by others, and save money/time doing it.
#133088From: Bob RakoskyJul 3, 1988 10:07 PM
Larry, Offering support _only_ for unmodified software is the only way feasible, but even with that position, I'd still be expecting calls for support for "unmodified" versions that in fact were modified. And to track that down would be a royal pain in the a**. If this policy were the norm, then it would be hard for users to keep track of which software packages that they use were modified, and which were virginal – especially 6 months or more after they started using the software, and had almost forgotten about it's existence. It would be difficult at best to implement, and closer to impossible.
#133096From: John DraperJul 3, 1988 10:44 PM
Bob, Your points are well taken. I do think though that this should not be a 'blanket' policy for all things, but there are certain pieces of software that cry out for availability of source so that they can be modified to suit the users needs. The hddisk.device is a case in point. CBM chooses not to support anything but the most generic of SCSI controllers, and those are for disk. What about all the tape drives and other SCSI devices that we might want to talk to? In this case, I feel that either the source or full documented functionality should be provided. As it stands right now, I am seriously considering going to another controller, and it's a shame because the 2090 is fast, low cost, and supports ST506 as well as SCSI. -larry