HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rafetmad@cheshire.oxy.edu (David R. Giller)
Subject: Re: HPFS question...
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 04:33:29 GMT

In article <pkwjht#.rcain@netcom.com> rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
>grendel@cis.ksu.edu (Stephen Spencer ) writes:
>: 
>: Okay.  'Ere we go... the $200 question: if I continue to use fat until I can
>: get more RAM, will I still be able to defrag them using norton or pctools
>: without harming the os/2 data?
>
>No, no and no.  No DOS utility that moves files may be used on a disk
>that contains EA DATA. SF with impunity.  Including any file (as opposed
>to disk image) restore.  EA's are *the* Achiles heel of compatability
>claims with DOS/Windows.  Do I get $200?
>
>If done from a DOS box under OS/2 I am probably totally wrong (I hope.)
>But don't even think of it from a DOS boot.
>
>Anybody know who gets the credit for EA's.  MS or IBM?

I'm afraid I disagree here.  EA's are a mixed blessing under FAT: They cause
integrity problems, they modify (slightly) the directory structure, and they
introduce some unnecessary physical dependancies on the system.  However, they
allow some things in OS/2 that would be impossible otherwise, or at least
abominably slow, and OS/2 on other than HPFS is a kludge anyway.

If you use OS/2, there are just some things that you won't be able to do
with DOS-specific tools.  This is becuase of the way that DOS works, that's
all.

I do have one suggestion, however.  IBM, we need the option of HPFS floppies.
Fine, turn lazy writing off for non-lockable removable media.  But disallowing
HPFS on floppies is no easier than allowing it, and HPFS' benefits on floppies
would greatly increase floppy performance.

OK, two suggestions.  Along with the hard-coded information in the EA DATA. SF
file, put directory-relative info, so EAs are reconstructible from DOS-damaged
drives.  Maybe this is already there, but it doesn't work.  I don't care if
it slows down the system when it is reconstructing the EAs, it's better than
losing them!  And yes, there are some partitions that will remain FAT for
compatibility.

-Dave
-- 
David Giller, Box 134 | Q: How many Oregonians does it take to screw in a light
Occidental College    | bulb?  A: Three.  One to replace the bulb, and two to
1600 Campus Road      | fend off all the Californians trying to share the
Los Angeles, CA 90041 | experience. ---------------------------rafetmad@oxy.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: smsmith@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith)
Subject: Re: Manuals with OS/2 V.2 as shipped.
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 05:36:34 GMT

rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
>
>I too am a "manual(s) in my lap" person and definitely want the option. I'll
>pay more, no problem.  Just give me the frigging option!

YES.  I would at least like the option of paying extra for a good
set of manuals, even if it cost me $40.  Or how about making the
manuals available in electronic format for $5 and let the enduser
print it out?  

SS
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Need help printing!
Keywords: OS/2 printer problems
Date: 14 Apr 92 02:42:38 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <1992Apr13.231433.7883@athena.mit.edu> yleung@athena.mit.edu (Yolanda A Leung) writes:
>I have the GA version installed on my homebrew 386-20mhz, and it runs
>fine - except for one important fact.  I can't get the printer to work
>in any of the sessions - be it DOS, OS/2 or Win-OS/2.  I have the printer
>object which uses the correct driver- for a Panasonic KX-4420 (HP IIP
>compatible).  I also tried the HP driver if that is any help, and I
>just get one blip on my Ready indicator, then nothing until I get a message
>from OS/2 telling me that my printer is not responding.  What gives?  Any
>clues?  I figure if it can blip once in response to the start of a job,
>there isn't any problem in the connections.  I have it on LPT1, I even
>tried setting the timeout higher - to 100.  HELP!

A couple items to check:

(1)  The parallel printer card.  Make sure it is generating
interrupts.  If using LPT1, make sure it is configured for IRQ 7.
Also make sure no other device in the system is using IRQ 7 -- a
SoundBlaster, for example.  Swap parallel printer cards with a friend
to test if necessary.

(2)  The printer cable.  You must use a fully wired cable.  Swap
cables with a friend if you have problems to see if that helps.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
From: lucky@netcom.com (Lucky Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: IBM, are you listening? (Was: Windoze 3.1 is here.)
Keywords: Yesterday(4 April) I saw Windoze 3.1 for sale here.
Date: 7 Apr 92 07:44:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.wwpjqga.lucky
Organization: D&C

gwebster@student.UVic.CA (Gord Webster) writes:
>You've dropped the ball. Are you so afraid of Micro$loth that you are
>willing to let OS/2 die a lingering and pitiful death?

I agree with every word in that post.  I have never seen a more pathetic
advertising campaign for a product that has a potential of being an
absolute winner.  I have ordered mine from IBM, but from what I see so
far, I am not sure OS/2 is going anywhere.  What in the world is going
on?  Is someone asleep?  I can't believe it.  Who the hell is in
charge of marketing for this product?  Can we please have his name?
Can we please have his name on the firing notice?  Please, WAKE UP!!!

l.
From: jeff@fang.clearpoint.com (Jeffrey J. Griglack)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Customizing the WPS
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:05:10 GMT
	<"barnacle.e.891:14.03.92.12.16.58"@clarkson.edu>
Reply-To: jeff@fang.clearpoint.com
Organization: /home/jeff/.organization

On 14 Apr 92 11:12:39 GMT, gthome@ausvm1.VNET.IBM.COM said:
gthome> Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
gthome> News-Software: UReply 2.0

gthome> In <=lxjm0p.rcain@netcom.com> Robert Cain writes:
>No, you cannot do what you (and I) want.  You must click on a window to
>give it the focus and tops it.  The "focus follows pointer" mode
>is not available.  This is mandated by CUA with no option.  I spoke
>with a CUA person at the OS2 & Windows conference that was on our side
>but she told me basically "good luck".
>
>It's not even technically difficult, they just don't want to. Or didn't.
>I sincerely hope that is changing.  I frequently want to interact with
>a window that is not the topmost.
>--
>Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007
>
>"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
>                                                    Victoria Roberts
>
gthome> Bob,

gthome> When one is running X Windows with TCPIP Ver 1.2 for OS/2, the mouse
gthome> behavior "focus follows pointer" occurs for open X windows.  I know that
gthome> this fact does not help much, but just letting you know.

I did not think that making the focus follow the pointer would be all
that hard.  It's not that hard under windows.  It is, however, very
annoying if you can't have the window stay in the background when it
is focused upon.  I suppose that I could right a NoClick type of
program to allow activation of a window without clicking on it, and
then I can just wait until IBM makes the interface so you can keep a
window partially obscured and still be active.  

Will that ability be added????????  I sure hope so.
--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Jeff Griglack             |  "The best kind of friend is like iron sharpening|
|jeff@fang.clearpoint.com  |  iron" -- "The Reptiles and I" by Shriek Back    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: KENKAHN@PKSMRVM.VNET.IBM.COM (Ken Kahn)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Can OS/2 V2.0 GA be installed from drive B?
Date: 13 Apr 92 00:13:29 GMT
Organization: Staff of IBM Fellow - NetWork Computing

In <1992Apr11.182128@masg1.epfl.ch> Ceki Gulcu writes:
>
>
>Will "RUN" statements in CONFIG.SYS work?
>

Certainly.  Any statement valid in a CONFIG.SYS is valid on Disk 1.  The file
OS2KRNLI on Install Disk 0 is the 'real' OS/2 V2 System Kernel and processes
that CONFIG.SYS as it does when you IPL a V2 system

>Furthermore, how should the 20 (or more) diskettes be copied to the VAX?
>

The directory structure used for a redirected install is as follows:

X:\OS2SE20\DISK_0\
           .
           .
        \DISK_15\
        \PMDD_1\
           .
           .
        \PMDD_5\

Again, there are a number of ways to specify the 'base' directory.  The name
X:\OS2SE20\ is up to you; the others must be named as shown.  You must XCOPY
each install disk to the appropriate directory.  There's an IBM Manual (a RED
Book I believe) that describes this whole process.  I'll have to look it up
and post it later (unless someone else knows it off hand).

Basically, you could then say

  SET OS2_SHELL=SYSINST2.EXE C:\OS2SE20\
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard)
Subject: Re: Help me correct OS/2 misinformation
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 16:15:24 GMT

In <1992Apr16.130928.19893@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:

>>Supposedly a friend of his had an IBM rep busy for an entire day trying to get
>>a beta version to install on a model 90, but it installed flawlessly on a 
>>Gateway.
>I'd find it hard to believe that any current IBM product wouldn't run
>on a current-model IBM piece of hardware.
 
I believe I saw mention on Compuserve of some problems with EARLY
PRODUCTION model 90s not running 2.0GA.  This was a hardware problem
with the model 90 memory that required a fix, not an OS/2 problem.
(Part of the well-known phenomenon
that OS/2 is a better menory tester than most diagnostics, I guess.)
-- 
Alan Ballard                   | Internet: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca
University Computing Services  |   Bitnet: USERAB1@UBCMTSG
University of British Columbia |    Phone: 604-822-3074
Vancouver B.C. Canada V6T 1Z2  |      Fax: 604-822-5116
From: gt0040a@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Michael Sorensen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Some questions about OS/2......
Date: 17 Apr 92 20:10:00 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <JEFF.92Apr15181945@fang.clearpoint.com> jeff@fang.clearpoint.com (Jeffrey J. Griglack) writes:

>M> also, if you switch over to HPFS on your drives totally, you will find disk
>M> operations running several times faster than on FAT drives.

>If you switch everything over to HPFS (I am assuming that this is what
>you are saying by "totally"), then how do you sill have FAT drives??

The above was a comparison- HPFS drives are faster than FAT drives. Also, you
will always have a FAT disk on your system, unless you're working on a
floppy-less PC.
       Tom Sorensen

-- 
Tom Sorensen              gt0040a@prism.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech 
And no, I don't like this .signature.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: dyoung@netcom.com (David Young)
Subject: Re: Eggheads see the light
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 03:35:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

From article <1992Apr14.160616.26170@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, by woc8r@fulton.seas.Virginia.EDU (William Owen Carlson):
> 
> At the OS/2 rollout event in Charlottesville yesterday, one of the 
> IBM employees mentioned that April 15 (tomorrow), they would start
> shipping to retail channels.
> 
> --
> ___    ___
> \  \  /  /       -=Bill Carlson=-
>  \  \/  /            
>   \    /         INTERNET:  woc8r@fulton.seas.Virginia.EDU

FYI, OS/2 2.0 shrinkwrap is on the shelves today (April 15th) at Fry's
Electronics in Sunnyvale Ca.

-- 
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  David M. Young   |                    |  Real airplanes have two wings |
| dyoung@netcom.com |                    |  and round engines.    - Anon  |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Our life is frittered away by detail...Simplify, simplify.   - Thoreau  |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: horan@ecs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Seamless Windoze question.
Date: 13 Apr 92 10:49:50 GMT

I've read a few posts about graphics resolutions and seamless windows,
so I'll sum up what I think so far, and could someone tell me if this is
right.

- Seamless windows is when I just run say... CorelDRAW! right from the 
  PM and it appears on the desktop without having a windoze desktop manager
  present.

- Having a TSENT4000 (DSS) card, I can run OS/2 with my old 1.3 768x1024x16
  driver, or with the 640x480x256 standard driver that comes with OS2/2.

- I can only run the Seamless windows with the 640x480x256 system setup.

- If I want to use the 768x1024x16 setup, I will have to run a windows 
  desktop manager (or it's equivalent of the PM, whatever it's called)
  and then run applications from that.

- The windoze desktop manager just mentioned will have to be run full screen,
  but of course I can hotkey to dos/os/2 apps any time.

Is this all right?  If so, does it seem like Diamond or Orchid will come out
with a driver that will allow 768x1024x256 with seamless windows.

5000
Gregg Horan
From: bradleyt@spot.Colorado.EDU (Todd "Slan" Bradley)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: stacker 2.0 status
Date: 6 Apr 92 20:19:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: ucsu.1992Apr6.201938.14178
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <1992Apr6.182648.24437@sbcs.sunysb.edu> altman@sbpmt.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman) writes:
>
>According to the Egghead in Commack, NY they have Stacker version 2.0, but
>there is no version for OS/2.  When I spoke several months ago with the
>Product Development Manager (Frank Cohen (619) 431-0880) about an OS/2 2.0
>version he told me that Stac Electronics was not interested in developing
>such a product.

Go check out the IBMOS2 area on Compuserve.  I just logged in 
earlier today and read Stac's announcment that they are indeed
developing Stacker for OS/2 2.0.  According to the announcement,
it will go into beta this summer.  I'm sure someone who doesn't
mind paying Compuserve's online fees as much as I do will repost
a copy of the announcement soon.

Todd.

-- 
Todd "Slan" Bradley -- Postmodern Reaganomics Renaissance Man, The 
Exception to Every Rule, An Example To All Men, The Biggest Jerk In 
The World, Supreme Ruler Of The Galaxy, AND Captain of The Flying 
Bitheads Ultimate Frisbee Team. (303) 443-6317 or 492-5826
From: jgay@digi.lonestar.org (john gay)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Help!  OS/2 in Denver
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:34:24 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Apr10.194013.35344@slate.mines.colorado.edu> cjmarsha@slate.mines.colorado.edu (Charles Marshall) writes:

>Yeah, hmmm.  Sounds like a Windows person wrote that, now doesn't it?  How
>about some REAL reasons for not installing OS/2!!!

How about:
1) I can't get a copy of OS/2 v2.0


seems to be the only reason 99% of PC users need.
no sarcasm needed when the truth is worse...


john gay.                      jgay@digi.lonestar.org
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: DPMI problems in 2.0
Date: 9 Apr 92 18:57:58 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <ignacij.702829676@meishan> ignacij@meishan (Ignacy Misztal) writes:
>To compile fortran programs using gcc, I planned on using a 32 bit f2c
>that was compiled using Borland C++ 3.0 for the DPMI mode. However the
>32-bit executable does not run but returns a message:
>DPMI operating system error
>The program is run in a DOS window with DPMI enabled with 6 Mbyte RAM. 
>I am running 304e. Is OS/2 running all DPMI programs or are there any exclusions?

Have you tried switching DPMI_DOS_API to "ON" or "ENABLED" (I can't
remember which) instead of "AUTO"?
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 Ad + 800 order number for Canada
Date: 15 Apr 92 03:53:42 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

The most interesting thing I found about that add was the trademark statement
in the tiniest print.  After attributing all of IBM's registered trademarks
and trademarks it simply says, "All other products are trademarks of their
respective companies."

Several products are mentioned with a litle tm or circled r after them
*including* Windows.  While MicroSoft's product is mentioned, MicroSoft
isn't. Don't you need permission to do that under a blanket?

Real nice add but the fact that all the screens have Windows windows in
them is a bit enigmatic.
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
From: amund@itk.unit.no (Amund Skavhaug)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Mathematica or Maple under OS/2 2.0?
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:05:02 GMT
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology / SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway

Maple 1.1 runs fine in the dos boxes. Ver 1.0 used vcpi, and can not run
under os2 2.0. By the way, yes I HAVE tried both, used ver 1.1, and everything
works fine....Matlab386 does work now also, ver 3.5k (?) released in Desember.
I ran both of these from a NFS disk on a Sun while I had quite a load on my
machine (xserver,telnet,formatting, NFS-server (HEVY LOADED!) ,WordPerfect, chess,xterm,endless xcopying,printscreen'ing....Maple and Matlab386
doesn't seem to slow down more than the CPU load forces eg IO did not matter
much...perfect.
NB! The docs for both of these seems to indicate that they should not work with
os2...only the documentation not up to date.
-- 

Regards, Amund Skavhaug

Division of Engineering Cybernetics	: Phone +47 7 594376
The Norwegian Institute of Technology	: Fax   +47 7 594399
N-7034 Trondheim                        : Email amund@itk.unit.no
NORWAY
From: adhir@cygnus.umd.edu (Alok Dhir)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: the 16550 and Hamilton C shell?
Date: 10 Apr 92 23:41:04 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization

Is this 16550 chip thing something that you install in High Speed modems
then?  I have a v32bis Supra fax modem (brand new)...I think it uses some-
thing called the Rockwell chipset...would it have the chip already?  

I am buying a 486 in like a day or two...will the I/O (serial) card have
a space for this chip as well?  

If these questions sound ignorant, it's because I am about this particular
subject.  Please explain further the way to go about installing the 
chip.  If I get an I/O card w/o the chip, but there is a socketed UART,
shoudl I replace it even though my modem might already have the chip?  
Meaning, is it something the modem AND serial port should have?

Thanks for the help...
						
					- Al

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: harlick@lindy.Stanford.EDU (Will Clark)
Subject: Re: Manuals with OS/2 V.2 as shipped.
Organization: Stanford University
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 19:54:22 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.080143.8368@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n9046319@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Jeremy Corley) writes:
>
>	One gripe I have with on line manuals: I can't read them while
>lying in bed.  I do most of my reading that way.  (Hmmm...maybe I need
>to talk myself into a laptop...NOT!)
>
>					J. Corley

Me too.  I read the manual through as soon as I can after receiving a
new piece of software.  I usually don't understand everything, but
enough info 'sticks' that I at least remember that I *can* do specific
things, even if I don't remember how.  From there it is usually not
much work to look up the feature I want to use.  I can't read as much
off the screen because my eyes and back get tired.

(This doesn't work too well with really *huge* software, but I do try
to read the first few sections of the manual no matter what.)

Will Clark
will.an@site007.saic.com
------------------------
SAIC does not share my opinions.
harlick@lindy is a friend's account, but you can send me email here, too.
From: b39y@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: OS/2 and Netware - Bug.
Date: 6 Apr 92 13:22:15 EST
Distribution: comp
Organization: Cornell University

Has anyone besides me noticed that in 6.304E the Novell Requester has a bug
which issues an error message when one tries to rename a file on the
network?  Does anyone know if this is a known bug, and will it be fixed in
Novell's update for GA?  Does anyone know when Novell will release updated
Netware requesters for OS/2 2.0 GA?

Help.

Dave Rodger
dave@cont-ed.mail.cornell.edu
From: ba014@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Matthew C. Brinkhoff)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: SVGA & Full-Screen DOS Question
Date: 13 Apr 92 21:29:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr13.212902.19017
Reply-To: ba014@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Matthew C. Brinkhoff)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


One quick question:  If I'm running a full-screen DOS session under OS/2
2.0, will I be able to access SVGA modes from DOS programs (CSHOW, VPIC,
etc.)?

-- 
o-------------------------------------------------------------------------o
| Orwell was an optimist! | ba014@cleveland.freenet.edu | E Pluribus Unix |
o-------------------------------------------------------------------------o
From: km4c+@andrew.cmu.edu (Ke-Wei Ma)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Accelerator boards and os
Date: 6 Apr 92 16:37:14 GMT
Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.os2.misc: 5-Apr-92 Accelerator boards and
os by Andrew Carpenter@f501.n9 
> Orchid says they will have OS/2 2.0 drivers out for their Fahrenheit S3
> board.  I assume that with these drivers the board will be able to
> offload OS/2 graphical instructions into its processor, although I
> don't know for sure. (I hope so, since I just got a 486 with a local bus
> S3 card!...)

    Please correct me if I am wrong but the Fahrenheit S3 has no
"processor."  I always thought it was just a really fast
frame-buffer-grabber thing.

Ke-Wei
From: daly@ecs.umass.edu (Bryon Daly, ECE dept, UMass, Amherst)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Compilers available for OS/2 v2?
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:20:04 GMT

I'm probably going to order a copy of OS/2 v2 this week and have a few
questions:

  What kind of time frame am I looking at to wait before it arrives?  (4 weeks?
Longer?  Shorter?)  Since I waited this long, might I be better off waiting
until it finally hits the stores?  (Oh yeah, get this: Electronics Boutique
salesman tells me they might get it, in 6 months or so, "When it comes out".
Up to the minute with their facts, those guys.)

Does anyone know if Diamond have or plan to make SVGA drivers for the 
Speedstar? 
       
  I heard Borland is coming of with a 32-bit compiler for it.  Is this due out
soon, or not for a while yet?  Is there any compiler that can be used in the
meantime?  

Thanks,
-Bryon
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc