OS2 World.Com Forum OS2 World.Com Online Discussion Forum. |
|
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 277 since: 10 Aug, 2004 |
|
21. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
Farq (01 Mar, 2006 22:55): No, what they were saying was right. I'm looking for why you use OS/2 when there are much more popular and more supported OSes out there such as BSD, Linux, and Windows. Also, as I recall SuperBT, OS/2 has some downfalls such as the fact that if you don't input a window loop procedure, the whole GUI crashes and the system needs to be restarted. And I'm sure you like opening WinOS/2 then wanting to go to fullscreen you can't just press Alt+F4, you need to close the window, then open the full screen session. I'd love to get eComStation, but Red Hat would be far superiour on the IBM Intellistation M Pro.
I assume the GUI thing you're talking about is the Single Input Queue which many people have pointed to as being a "flaw" of OS/2. Yes, badly coded software has in the past been able to cause the Single Input Queue to lock up, resulting in the GUI freezing up. But there's a few things worth pointing out. First of all, there was a lot of work put into this problem on the part of IBM. Since Fixpak 17 in Warp 3, there has been a work-around coded into the system allowing the user to be able to close mis-behaving applications locking up the input queue, in most cases not requiring a restart. The fixes have been improved through Warp 3 Fixpak 17 and above, and the base release of Warp 4, and subsequently in later fixpaks, Warp Server for e-Business, and the convenience packs. Today it is *very rare* to run into an input queue lockup that actually requires a restart. I havn't had such a lockup in about 7 or 8 years. The second point that I'd make is that even if the input queue does get locked up, it does *not* lock up the whole operating system. Applications running in the background still continue to run. You can have your GUI locked up and still have your web server, database server, FTP server, spreadsheet calculating, graphics rendering, etc, running in the background safely. To comment on the idea of pressing alt-f4 to put a win-os/2 application into full screen mode, I don't know where you're coming from. Alt-F4 in any version of Windows (and in OS/2 for that matter) will close a running application. So pressing ALT-F4 is never going to get your Windows application to run full screen. If you're running a Windows 3.1 application in a non-fullscreen WinOS/2 session, you can still maximize the window and use it as a "full screen" on your desktop, just as you can in Windows. True, this won't run the full Windows session in a fullscreen session, but if your application runs fine on the OS/2 desktop, why would you need to put the entire session into full screen? |
| Date: 02 Mar, 2006 on 05:01 |
|
|
Normal member in user
       posts: 49 since: 23 Jan, 2004 |
|
22. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| As someone pointed out, the "input queue" locking problem isn't really a problem anymore. It hasn't happened in years. What is special about this problem is that the odd time it occurs, it really is only the GUI. You can safely let things run in the background and finish if you need to. Or if it is a server, who cares? Just let it run. Not sure what you're referring to about full screen sessions and switching to them. If I'm running in a window and I want my full-screen session, it's a click away, minimized on the desktop. If I want to come back, it is Alt-ESC away. Why do you think RedHat would be better on an Intellistation? I think for some purposes, you'd do better to have Linux on the machine. I run Linux everyday at work on a variety of machines, some of them very new. I _don't_ think Linux is better than OS/2 or eCS on them for general purpose work. Quite the opposite actually. |
| Date: 02 Mar, 2006 on 07:23 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 124 since: 20 Nov, 2003
 |
|
23. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
last updated at 02 Mar, 2006 15:11 (1 times) Hi all, just my two cents about the "full screen Windows" thing.Farq, I think your doubts come from the fact that you have no experience (or little) with OS/2. You are probably imagining a windowed Windows session as something constrained in a window on the desktop, much like a VirtualPC session can be constrained in a window or switched to full screen. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. A "windowed" Windows session, is not windowed at all, in fact we call it "seamless". What you have is the windows of the Windows applications are shown on the OS/2 desktop just like any other _native_ PM window. You can tell them apart just because they have different widgets. OTOH, a "full-screen" Windows session has its own desktop, completely separated from the OS/2 desktop, and you can switch between the two. As you can see, this is actually *less* desireable than the "seamless" way of doing things. There absolutely is no point in switching a session from windowed (seamless) to full-screen. Keep in mind that if you need an application to run in a full-screen session for whatever reason, you can simply start _THAT_ application in a full-screen session, while leaving the others running seamlessly. You can start as many Windows sessions as you want (well, not really... but a lot more than you could actually need), everyone with its own settings, and everyone is multitasked and protected independing of the others. Quite powerful, uh? Really, a Windows session - at least a full-screen one - is nothing more than a pumped-up DOS session for OS/2. Hope this helps... Bye Cris |
| Date: 02 Mar, 2006 on 15:09 |
|
|
Normal member in user
     posts: 22 since: 28 Dec, 2005 |
|
24. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| Date: 13 Mar, 2006 on 01:41 |
|
|
Normal member in user
     posts: 31 since: 03 Feb, 2004 |
|
25. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| I recently decided to stop using OS/2 alltogether and use Linux. This was due to MANY MANY broken parts of OS/2 which have existed since 1994. I have installed all of the fixes available on the eCS website (I purchased eCS 1.0 a few years back) and am still on the blink. However, this is not going the way you might think... I ran Slackware Linux for about a week. I have alot of experience with Slackware. I then switched to Debian Sarge after a friend went through the trouble to make me 14 CDs of it. My USB stuff magically started working. However, this is not a done deal. My installed base of Debian is 1.7GB! If you want a functional desktop, you MUST run KDE, GNOME, or some other titan of garbage. CUPS is a pain, as well. ..And apparently 256MB ram isn't enough for Debian. So OS/2 is back on my PC. Why? Because I like it. Even with all of its flaws, I can't imagine using anything else. It's small, fast, easy to use, and I can recover it from just about any crash it can dish out. My renewed interest and respect has brought me to the conclusion that perhaps as a developer of OS/2 software, it is time to give back. Besides, modern software is terrible. Debian has at least 14 CDs of software. Much of this is like ...Tetris for terminals..
|
| Date: 13 Mar, 2006 on 16:05 |
|
|
Premium member in staff
       posts: 2298 since: 12 Jan, 2001
 |
 |
26. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| I had alot fewer crashes on my OS/2 Warp or eComStation computer than I ever did on my Win pc. Plus there are alot fewer vyruses that can affect my OS/2 or eCS pc than there are for Win. When my OS/2 or eCS pc did crash, it was usually a Win program that I tried to run. Of the ones I use, there were OS/2-eCS versions (ie; Mozilla, StarOffice/OpenOffice, PMView, WarpVision, etc).
---
BigWarpGuy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OS/2-eCS.org Director of Communications - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - supporting the past OS/2 user and the future eCS user http://www.os2ecs.org
|
| Date: 13 Mar, 2006 on 17:24 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 277 since: 10 Aug, 2004 |
|
27. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| Farq, With all due respect, after reading your article it seems clear to me that you've never used OS/2. To begin with:
Why do people use OS/2?OS/2 has a security niche due to unpopularity. There are literally no real threats to an OS/2 based OS, except maybe Adware, Spyware, and Worms. Though OS/2 has security loopholes, no hacker or virus programmers actually care any more to exploit them(its little market share discourages them). Many features hearleded in other Operating Systems have been present in OS/2 for years(such as speech interperetation via a program I think is called WarpTalk). OS/2 has a large binary compatibility. It can read its own binaries, REXX, Win16, some Win32(with ODIN), java, and X11(with VM) programs all in a convienient system.
There are a few obvious errors in this paragraph. First, it is true that part of the security in OS/2 is due to unpopularity. But a big part of it is because IBM made it to be secure. When your target customer is customers like banks and insurance companies, there is an expectation that the system will be secure. When places where security is vital - such as nuclear reactors - have been known to run OS/2 in some of their systems - it isn't just because the system is "unpopular", but it also has something to do with the fact that it is secure. One big reason that OS/2 still gets used today which is an obvious (in my opinion) omission in this paragraph is the fact that it is fully object-oriented, and the WorkPlace Shell. Sure, I can get FireFox and OpenOffice and Thunderbird and other applications on other platforms. But I can't get the WPS anywhere else. And my final comment - the Voice Recognition is called VoiceType, not "Warptalk".
Why do people hate OS/2?OS/2 was not updated by IBM for years until Serenity publish eComStation, which offered much more than OS/2 Warp 4 offered. OS/2 is notorius for FixPack Hell. You required certain fixpacks(in OS/2 Warp 3 there were 35 fixpacks in all) to run certain drivers and applications. Another problem with OS/2 in earlier years was Drivers. When compared to a driver installation in Windows 3.1, OS/2 2.0 made it difficult. This was fixed later. The UI in OS/2 is similar to windows, but users will probably find themselves disoriented with its different Close, Minimize, and Maximize Widgets. Rather than a taskbar featuring all user run minimized and maximized applications, OS/2 kept all run applications in a running applications dialog avilble when right clicking and selecting the option in the Taskbar. This can be confusing, but the problem was again resolved with a more windows style taskbar in eComStation. By far one of the most irritating problems are Sessions in WinOS/2, and console sessions. You can't just maximize the console to full screen mode. You have to quit the window and go to Fullscreen.
Again, there are some glaring errors. IBM has done quite a bit of updating on OS/2. eComStation has been available for around 6 years now. During that time, IBM released a number of convenience packs for both the OS/2 client and the server. These included updates and new features and updated device drivers (such as LVM and JFS in the client). I'm not sure what you mean by "Fixpak Hell". Each new fixpak that IBM released included all the fixes from previous fixpaks. So if you install a Warp 3 system, and want the latest fixes, you simply need to install Fixpak 40 for Warp 3 (the latest released Fixpak for Warp 3). If you install Warp 4 and want the latest fixpak, you simply need Fixpak 15 for Warp 4. With utilities such as Updcd you can also create a refreshed install CD, which will incorporate the latest fixpak on to an install CD - then if you're doing a fresh install, you get all the fixes installed by default - no need to install any fixpak. This really is no different from installing a Windows service pack, only with Windows there is no way (that I'm aware of) to create a refreshed install CD. Comments about the User Interface, again I'm not sure where you're coming from. Every user interface is slightly different. Heck - just look at some of the changes between Windows 2000 and Windows XP! Linux has a different GUI, as does MacOSX, etc. The fact is, if you use the GUI for a bit, you'll get used to it pretty quickly. The comments about the WinOS/2 sessions, they've already been replied to. Essentially, if your Windows 3.1 application runs fine in a seamless window, then there is no need to run it in full screen mode. But if you want to, you can - or you can even run one copy in a seamless window, and another copy in a "full screen" windows. No big deal. As for DOS windows, you can switch them from being a window to full screen without having to quit your DOS session. That capability has been there since at least Version 2.0. Anyways, those are just mu thoughts. |
| Date: 14 Mar, 2006 on 17:47 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 277 since: 10 Aug, 2004 |
|
28. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
Fahrvenugen (14 Mar, 2006 17:47): Farq,With all due respect, after reading your article it seems clear to me that you've never used OS/2. To begin with:
Why do people use OS/2?OS/2 has a security niche due to unpopularity. There are literally no real threats to an OS/2 based OS, except maybe Adware, Spyware, and Worms. Though OS/2 has security loopholes, no hacker or virus programmers actually care any more to exploit them(its little market share discourages them). Many features hearleded in other Operating Systems have been present in OS/2 for years(such as speech interperetation via a program I think is called WarpTalk). OS/2 has a large binary compatibility. It can read its own binaries, REXX, Win16, some Win32(with ODIN), java, and X11(with VM) programs all in a convienient system.
There are a few obvious errors in this paragraph. First, it is true that part of the security in OS/2 is due to unpopularity. But a big part of it is because IBM made it to be secure. When your target customer is customers like banks and insurance companies, there is an expectation that the system will be secure. When places where security is vital - such as nuclear reactors - have been known to run OS/2 in some of their systems - it isn't just because the system is "unpopular", but it also has something to do with the fact that it is secure. One big reason that OS/2 still gets used today which is an obvious (in my opinion) omission in this paragraph is the fact that it is fully object-oriented, and the WorkPlace Shell. Sure, I can get FireFox and OpenOffice and Thunderbird and other applications on other platforms. But I can't get the WPS anywhere else. And my final comment - the Voice Recognition is called VoiceType, not "Warptalk".
Why do people hate OS/2?OS/2 was not updated by IBM for years until Serenity publish eComStation, which offered much more than OS/2 Warp 4 offered. OS/2 is notorius for FixPack Hell. You required certain fixpacks(in OS/2 Warp 3 there were 35 fixpacks in all) to run certain drivers and applications. Another problem with OS/2 in earlier years was Drivers. When compared to a driver installation in Windows 3.1, OS/2 2.0 made it difficult. This was fixed later. The UI in OS/2 is similar to windows, but users will probably find themselves disoriented with its different Close, Minimize, and Maximize Widgets. Rather than a taskbar featuring all user run minimized and maximized applications, OS/2 kept all run applications in a running applications dialog avilble when right clicking and selecting the option in the Taskbar. This can be confusing, but the problem was again resolved with a more windows style taskbar in eComStation. By far one of the most irritating problems are Sessions in WinOS/2, and console sessions. You can't just maximize the console to full screen mode. You have to quit the window and go to Fullscreen.
Again, there are some glaring errors. IBM has done quite a bit of updating on OS/2. eComStation has been available for around 6 years now. During that time, IBM released a number of convenience packs for both the OS/2 client and the server. These included updates and new features and updated device drivers (such as LVM and JFS in the client). I'm not sure what you mean by "Fixpak Hell". Each new fixpak that IBM released included all the fixes from previous fixpaks. So if you install a Warp 3 system, and want the latest fixes, you simply need to install Fixpak 40 for Warp 3 (the latest released Fixpak for Warp 3). If you install Warp 4 and want the latest fixpak, you simply need Fixpak 15 for Warp 4. With utilities such as Updcd you can also create a refreshed install CD, which will incorporate the latest fixpak on to an install CD - then if you're doing a fresh install, you get all the fixes installed by default - no need to install any fixpak. This really is no different from installing a Windows service pack, only with Windows there is no way (that I'm aware of) to create a refreshed install CD. Comments about the User Interface, again I'm not sure where you're coming from. Every user interface is slightly different. Heck - just look at some of the changes between Windows 3.1 and Windows 2000 and Windows XP! Linux has a different GUI, as does MacOSX, etc. The fact is, if you use the GUI for a bit, you'll get used to it pretty quickly. The comments about the WinOS/2 sessions, they've already been replied to. Essentially, if your Windows 3.1 application runs fine in a seamless window, then there is no need to run it in full screen mode. But if you want to, you can - or you can even run one copy in a seamless window, and another copy in a "full screen" windows. No big deal. As for DOS windows, you can switch them from being a window to full screen without having to quit your DOS session. That capability has been there since at least Version 2.0. Anyways, those are just mu thoughts.
|
| Date: 14 Mar, 2006 on 17:52 |
|
|
Normal member in user
     posts: 152 since: 16 Aug, 2004 |
|
29. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| Re: the comment about RedHat on an Intellistation... I know of no other OS that has been so thoroughly tested on Intellistations, nor (via Netfinity Manager) capable of hardware failure prediction (and not just for hard drives). Many Intellistations are really renamed Netfinity single and dual CPU servers. Warp with simple scripts or freeware can even query temperatures from fans, all CPUs, voltages and more because the support for this is built in. |
| Date: 15 Mar, 2006 on 00:10 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 139 since: 15 Apr, 2004
 |
|
30. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| I must say, after having read the article I sat and scratched my head for a while wondering if I had the wrong link. Firstly, almost nothing said in it relates to any OS I ever used. And certainly not to OS/2 ... and I started with 2.0 way back when and,Secondly, although Farq created this thread to get feedback for his article I could not find a single thing from any of the replies. This raises two questions; Why was this thread created? and... What can possibly be the purpose of the article? Bizaare.
---
|
| Date: 15 Mar, 2006 on 08:25 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 124 since: 20 Nov, 2003
 |
|
31. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
Hi Farq, unfortunately I have to say what others have said before me: your article is so full of incorrect and plainly false statements that makes me wonder why are you willing to publish such things on the web. ...but you probably aren't reading this forum anymore, are you? |
| Date: 15 Mar, 2006 on 09:01 |
|
|
Team member in staff
       posts: 2128 since: 10 Dec, 2000
 |
 |
32. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| Well, reading the other "articles" it's kind of negativ approach on all of them, so don't really know why they actually set up the site when there is no kind of usage approach with the different OS they have listed. |
| Date: 15 Mar, 2006 on 10:48 |
|
|
Premium member in staff
       posts: 2298 since: 12 Jan, 2001
 |
 |
33. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
" So why use OS/2 with these problems?Many of the problems with OS/2 ware resolved with eComStation, so you won't find yourself in a enviroment as bad as that one. FixPacks are rare in eCS so don't worry about FixPack Hell. If you want an innovative, virus free OS, eComStation just could be right for you. " This seems - somewhat - positive (from the site). http://osadvocacy.frih.net/os2.shtml The site shows that it is an 'operating system hate site', which is ironic since it takes an operating system to create/post the site/webpage(?).
---
BigWarpGuy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OS/2-eCS.org Director of Communications - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - supporting the past OS/2 user and the future eCS user http://www.os2ecs.org
|
| Date: 15 Mar, 2006 on 19:39 |
|
|
Normal member in user
     posts: 22 since: 28 Dec, 2005 |
|
34. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| About the windowed-fullscreen session thing: I meant Alt-Enter. I was thinking of something else at the time. Really the point of that was that why bother to make two apps that do the same thing, by the same company for the same OS? I apologise for any incorrectness in the previous article. I have fixed the article and I hope more of it is true. The point of the site is: "Why do people use a particular OS when there are far superior OSes out there?", and "What are the flaws of any of the OSes?". This is why its an "OS hate site". It points the flaws of reasonably popular OSes out there. |
| Date: 17 Mar, 2006 on 01:53 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 277 since: 10 Aug, 2004 |
|
35. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
last updated at 17 Mar, 2006 02:52 (1 times) Uum, I just read the "updated" article, and have some commnents. OS/2 is notorius for somewhat irritating FixPack. You require floppy disks, around 15 usually. If you have a floppy disk that is more than capable of holding the fixpack, at times the Image writing utility exits after an "error" writing the data to the disk. One perfectly good disk I attempted to write a fixpack onto refused to copy after an "error". I cleared the disk and added several RARs until the disk was full.
The above is not entirely true. Yes, you can install Fixpaks from floppy disks, but you can also install them from hard disk. IBM has supported this for years - ever since the Remote Software Updates site came out back in about 1997 or so (or was it earlier? Anyone remember?). The RSU version of the CSF utility has always allowed you to install a fixpak which has been downloaded direct to your hard disk. It was (as I recall) documented in one of the CSF readme's, but many never bothered to read this, and there wasn't a nice button on the gui to "install fixpak from hard disk", so many probably never knew it was possible. The command is to unzip the RSU CSF utility in a directory on its own (I use c:\os2serv), unzip the RSU version of the Fixpak into its own directory (for example, c:\fp15) (or, I should mention - you can extract the disk images to your hard disk if you download the floppy disk version - with a utility such as dskxtrct which can be found on Hobbes), fire up an OS/2 command prompt, switch to the RSU directory, and enter the command: os2serv c:\os2serv\csf c:\fp15 It'll then start up a GUI which allows you to install the fixpak. This will work for any of the IBM fixpaks which requrie the IBM CSF facility. You just have to specify the correct fixpak directory. Alternatively, there have been applications on Hobbes for years (since at least Warp 3 Fixpak 5) to install a Fixpak off a hard disk (or CD Rom). So, the floppy disk requirement has not always been there - it again is one of those things which became no longer necessary in about 97 (and before that using 3rd party applications). |
| Date: 17 Mar, 2006 on 02:50 |
|
|
Normal member in user
     posts: 22 since: 28 Dec, 2005 |
|
36. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| Unfortunately, RSU isn't an option for me, as my OS/2 comp is not connected to the internet in anyway. I use my Windows/FreeBSD comp for the internet due to a problem with my DSL modem's drivers with OS/2. But, I shall look into the install utilities. I'm not wastin' my good floppies. |
| Date: 17 Mar, 2006 on 03:45 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 277 since: 10 Aug, 2004 |
|
37. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
last updated at 17 Mar, 2006 04:54 (1 times) Perhaps I need to be clearer, but the phrase "install from hard disk" does not mean "install while connected to the internet". You do *not* need to have an OS/2 machine connected to the internet to install a fixpak using the RSU - CSF facility. You can have it on your hard disk. Or you can burn it to a CD Rom. Or you can put it on a USB flash drive / memory stick. Or a ZIP drive. I've installed fixpaks using all of these media types successfully in the past.*But* you do need to be able to download the RSU version of the CSF facility and the desired fixpak(s) from the internet. You can download using any computer / operating system you wish. For example, if you're on Warp 4, the RSU version of Fixpak 15 (english language) is at: ftp://service.boulder.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/rsu/xr_m015/ In that directory, everything you need to install a fixpak from your hard disk (or CD Rom) is there - the RSU version of the CSF facility, and the ZIPped version of the fixpak. The only file that you *don't* need is: ftpinstl.zip Otherwise the CSF143.zip (the RSU version of CSF) and the xr_m015?.zip files (the fixpak files) are the ones you'll need to have to install locally off a hard disk. Hope this is a little clearer. |
| Date: 17 Mar, 2006 on 04:50 |
|
|
Premium member in user
     posts: 139 since: 15 Apr, 2004
 |
|
38. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
| If I'm not mistaken, the Fixtool solved the floppy problem way back when. It's been so long since the floppies days I have a hard time recalling it. It was phased out around the same time all other OS manufacturer's were phasing them out. Of course, eCS made all that stuff moot a long time ago. Simply run the eCS Maintenance Tool and all becomes simple and straight forward, or just install the convenience pak from CD if you deal with IBM. While it's clear that OS/2 like all software, has it's share of problems, it is far less annoying or devastating, (as the case may be), when something goes wrong and it is far more stable, (when properly setup), than any other OS out there or I'd'a tossed it a long time ago. But, it's the best. The fact that it can't run a lot of Windows software is a plus if you ask me. Most Windows based software is so invasive, so bloated, clunky and user-unfriendly I just can't stand to use it or even have it on my machine... and I'm not going to get into the spyware thing, (there is no such equivalent on OS/2). I've been connected to the internet and running internet servers for OS/2 since before there was a World Wide Web, and I've yet to get a virus. The Synchronous Input Queque problem was solved ages ago, (not Single Input Queque). It can still topple over, but it's just harder to make it do so and easier to get back on it's feet. One big example that comes to mind is wiping your OS/2 partition and extracting from a backup. Try that with Windows. Oops... I'm rambling. It's late, I'm going to bed.
---
|
| Date: 17 Mar, 2006 on 05:51 |
|
|
Normal member in user
     posts: 22 since: 28 Dec, 2005 |
|
39. Re:Why do you use OS/2? |
|
|
Fahrvenugen (17 Mar, 2006 04:54): Perhaps I need to be clearer, but the phrase "install from hard disk" does not mean "install while connected to the internet". You do *not* need to have an OS/2 machine connected to the internet to install a fixpak using the RSU - CSF facility. You can have it on your hard disk. Or you can burn it to a CD Rom. Or you can put it on a USB flash drive / memory stick. Or a ZIP drive. I've installed fixpaks using all of these media types successfully in the past.*But* you do need to be able to download the RSU version of the CSF facility and the desired fixpak(s) from the internet. You can download using any computer / operating system you wish. For example, if you're on Warp 4, the RSU version of Fixpak 15 (english language) is at: ftp://service.boulder.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/rsu/xr_m015/ In that directory, everything you need to install a fixpak from your hard disk (or CD Rom) is there - the RSU version of the CSF facility, and the ZIPped version of the fixpak. The only file that you *don't* need is: ftpinstl.zip Otherwise the CSF143.zip (the RSU version of CSF) and the xr_m015?.zip files (the fixpak files) are the ones you'll need to have to install locally off a hard disk. Hope this is a little clearer.
Well, I got that sfix utility now from hobbes anyways. All I need to do now is reconnect my OS/2 hard drive and start the reinstall process(A slight problem disallowed me to access windows while with the OS/2 hard disk, but I'll be fixing that). I'll be sure to put that info onto the site. |
| Date: 17 Mar, 2006 on 22:13 |
|
|
|
|
| All times are CET+1. |
< Prev. | P. 1 2 | Next > |
|
|
|