Who's Online |
71 user(s) are online ( 43 user(s) are browsing Forums)
Members: 0
Guests: 71
more...
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Can AGP and PCI-66 be used simultaneously?
|
Posted on: 2007/9/14 0:56
#1601
|
Just can't stay away 
|
@Hans Quote:
Hans wrote:
Probably because it's a 33 MHz card.
Are there really PCI33-only sii0680 cards? Quote: The real question is if the same thing happens when a 66 MHz card is plugged in to the PCI-66 slot. As long as you have a card in the AGP slot as well it can't work. You can only use one of both. Quote: Another issue is if the firmware is able to cope. U-Boot only executes the firmware of gfx cards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Recover SFS partition !
|
Posted on: 2007/9/12 16:03
#1602
|
Just can't stay away
|
@Lio Quote:
Lio wrote:
@joerg
Quote:Recreating it with exactely the same settings (lowcyl, highcyl, blocksize, dostype, etc.) should have worked.
because it was in between 2 existing partitions, recreating it was easy, just with "add new partition" but as I said the partition appeared completely empty...
That way you can only be sure sure the low- and high-cylinder numbers are correct, but the rest of it (DOSType, BlockSize, Reserved, etc.) could still have been wrong. There are tools which can seach partitions on the HD and will display the corrct values for the partitions, but since you have formatted it they can only find the new, and probably wrong, values now and don't help anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Recover SFS partition !
|
Posted on: 2007/9/10 23:36
#1603
|
Just can't stay away
|
@Lio Quote:
Lio wrote:
Hi all,
I am using SFS 1.267 on a partition called docs: where I store scans of old magazines, on a 80Gb HD.
The partition was 8 Go but was nearly full so I created a new one at the end of the HD called "documents".
after save and reboot, I got 2 uninitialized partitions (docs and documents).
The most likely reason is that you accidentially moved, changed the size or some other settings of docs. Especially moving partitions by accident happens very easy, if you click on a partition and move the mouse a little bit while still holding the left mouse button the partition is moved  But HDToolBox should have warned you that the contents of the docs partition are lost in such a case. Quote: I thought that if I delete and recreate the docs partition, I should have everything back in place but no :( Recreating it with exactely the same settings (lowcyl, highcyl, blocksize, dostype, etc.) should have worked. Quote: after sfsformat, I have now a totally empty partition even sfssalv sees nothing in fast and deep mode...
are my scans lost forever ? After formatting it, especially if it didn't have the same settings anymore, there is probably not much left, if anything, which can be recovered. Quote: why 2 partitions sharing some caracters would become uninitialized ? Of course that shouldn't happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SFS problem with FastATA MK-III and 160GB drive
|
Posted on: 2007/9/8 20:01
#1604
|
Just can't stay away
|
@Calgor Quote: For example I have 3 partitions with problems, the rest are fine - sdh6:, sdh7:, sdh8:
If I format with SFS in order sdh6 sdh7 sdh8, then sdh6 reports problem, but sdh7 and sdh8 are okay.
If I then format sdh6, then sfscheck on sdh6 reports no errors, but sdh7 and sdh8 then do have problems even though I didn't do anything to them! Check the partition start and end offsets in the output of SFSQuery or SFSCheck, it sounds like the partitions are overlapping. If everything is correct the end offset of sdh6 should be the same as the start offset of sdh7 and the end offset of sdh7 the same as the start offset of sdh8 (if they are in that order on the HD without gaps or other partitions between them). If that's not the problem and these 3 partitions are not inside the first 128 GB of the HD it's probably a bug in the LBA48 code of FastATA, but if that's the case and it's writing to wong sectors in LBA48 mode writing to any partition which is (partitally) after the first 128 GB can destroy all partitions, incl. the ones inside the first 128 GB. Even if SFSCheck reports no errors that could have happened already, if unused or data blocks were overwritten SFSCheck can't detect it. Quote: Are there any other tools other than sfscheck I can use to verify the partitions? No. Quote: EDIT: Also, why is sfscheck expecting or finding block type 0x42544d50? Is that the sfs data block type identifier? 0x42544d50 ('BTMP') is the identifier for the bitmap?blocks, they are stored near the beginning of the partition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Problem mit dem SFS 1.275
|
Posted on: 2007/9/6 20:18
#1605
|
Just can't stay away
|
@BlackHawk Quote: Hoffe das das Problem zu l?sen ist. Ich habe kein AmigaOS 3.x System mehr um es selbst zu testen, bitte teste ob es mit dieser Version wieder funktioniert, danke. I don't have an AmigaOS 3.x System anymore to test it myself, plese test if this version fixes the problems, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SmartFileSystem 1.274
|
Posted on: 2007/9/1 15:36
#1606
|
Just can't stay away
|
@Richi Quote:
Richi wrote:
@joerg
I just saw you released the new 1.275 version!
One question: why did you switch back from MUTEX to Forbid?
2 OS4 beta testers had problems with SFS version 1.274 hanging on heavy usage and I thought I found a bug in the OS4 Mutex code, but I was wrong and the OS4 Mutex functions are correct. I can't reproduce the problems myself and I don't know yet what the actual problem is, but it's probably a bug the current beta versions of diskcache.library (not in the public version) and not in SFS or OS4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SFS problem with FastATA MK-III and 160GB drive
|
Posted on: 2007/9/1 10:04
#1607
|
Just can't stay away
|
@Calgor Quote: I have successfully used SFS with no problems on a 320GB hard drive connected to a CSPPC on a SCSI-IDE bridge, but the FastATA is causing grief.
SFSFormat reports no errors, but some of the partitions (up to 50GB in size) above 8GB have errors when using SFSCheck, and with these errors the partition remains uninitialized. Formatting one partition sometimes causes another to have errors: Sorry, I can't help, but you are not the only one with such problems with FastATA. Another user had the same problems, but unlike you not only with SFS, he had them with FFS as well, and no matter what he changed (HDs, cables, settings in the FastATA config, he even tried using PIO0) made it work. In the end he replaced the FastATA hard- and software with IDEFix, that way he can't use the complete HDs (IIRC he has 2 160 GB ones as well, but since IDEFix doesn't support LBA48 only the first 128 GB can be used), but at least he can use a large part of his HDs without problems now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Time Corrector Script
|
Posted on: 2007/8/21 17:05
#1608
|
Just can't stay away
|
@Atheist Quote: My AmigaOne loses about 2 seconds per hour, and it's been on for 8 days and is 7 minutes behind.
...
Another problem I have is if I don't use the internet (cable modem) for about a day and a half, when I try to use AWeb (it's still running), it loses the connection. So, I was thinking that if I ping the net once every 9 hours or so, that I wouldn't get a dropped connection. You could try to solve both problems at once with by runing following script Lab Start date >NIL: *>NIL: server pool.ntp.org Wait 60 Min Skip Start Back Quote: Would this also work?
Eval $Count + 1 to $Count No. SetEnv Count `Eval $Count + 1` Instead of SetEnv (global varibales) you should use Set (local varaibles) in such scripts. With SetEnv you couldn't run 2 scripts at the same time which use a variable "Count".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SmartFileSystem 1.274
|
Posted on: 2007/8/20 22:28
#1609
|
Just can't stay away
|
@TMTisFree Quote: As I said above, I know there are pb with two sticks inserted because memtester reports faults, but no error with either module alone. But I would like to fully test the modules with a bootable CD on a PC, but the one I currently work on has only DDR slots. Will check the Win98 PCs of my sons tomorrow. Testing the modules in a PC doesn't help if they pass memtester in the AmigaOne when used alone. The modules are not defect and will work, alone as well as both together, in the PC without any problems. But that doesn't mean they work together in an AmigaOne as well, if memtester reports errors they don't. (Make sure to use the current version of memtester, IIRC there were old versions of memtester which reported errors even if there were none becasue they overwrote wrong memory themself ...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SmartFileSystem 1.274
|
Posted on: 2007/8/20 22:15
#1610
|
Just can't stay away
|
@TMTisFree Quote: An other pb: I have a HDD that is not recognized anymore in either system I tested it (A1/UBoot, PC/BIOS). It contains 2 old SFS/2 partitions. I would like to recover the data by a specialized firm. Is it possible to recover the data? If yes, on which form? It depends on what is defect, if it's an electronic or mechanical defect they usually just take the discs from the non-working HD and build them into another, identical HD with working electronics and mechanics. If that's not possible, either because they can't get an identical HD, often even the firmware version has to be the same, or because the discs have errors due to head crashes, etc. the only thing they can do with file systems they don't know is to copy as much of the data they can recover to another HD, either the sectors directly or they put the data from the broken HD in one file on a NTFS, ext2fs, or whatever common file system with large file support you want, partition. If the discs themself had too serious errors, they can't recover all data and therefore using SmartFileSystem2 itself doesn't work to access the data I could build a special SmartFileSystem2 version of SFSSalv or PartitionWizard for you. If they know the file system(s) which was/were used on the broken HD you get a new HD with the same partitions and individual files instead, but even if there are companies which offer such a service for custom file systems as well the fee would be huge, not "just" the usual hundreds or thousends US$ (depending on the size of the HD), especially for a file system they'll never have to deal with again and for which they would have to write special recovery software only for a single HD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Smart FileSystem size support and limitations
|
Posted on: 2007/8/20 20:24
#1611
|
Just can't stay away
|
@mailman Quote: I have an issues that really bother me. What are the limitations and what is supported by SFS 1.274 (regarding filesize)? With DOSType SFS\0 it's the same as in all older AmigaOS versions of SFS: Max. partition size: 128 GB, independent of the block size. Max. file size: 4,294,967,294 bytes (4 GB - 2 bytes). DOSType SFS\2: Max. partition size: 1 TB * blocksize/512. Max. file size: more than enough  (more than the max. partition size). But independent of the limits in the file system there is probably a lot of old software which fail with files >= 2GB already, and nearly everything which doesn't use the new 64 bit dos.library functions (ExamineDir(), GetFileSize(), ChageFileSize(), GetFilePosition(), ChangeFilePosition(), ...) or the 64 bit C library I/O functions doesn't work with files >= 4 GB. Quote: And one more thing. What are the advantages of a new format with large file support above that what was available in previous versions? If you mean the old SmartFileSystem2 versions: They didn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: SmartFileSystem 1.274
|
Posted on: 2007/8/18 20:00
#1612
|
Just can't stay away
|
@TMTisFree Quote: Does the current 'limitation' in partition width still apply? I have 2 1TB HDDs and 20 or so partitions... The limit for 'SFS\2' partitons is 1 TB. Or even more if you don't use 512 bytes/block, for example with 32 KB/block partitions of up to 64 TB should be possible. But I didn't test if that actually works But even if it works you shouldn't create such large partitions, SFSDDefrag and when 'SFS\2' support is added tools like SFSCheck, PartitionWizard, etc. need several 100 MB RAM to work on a 1 TB partition ... Creating or restoring a backup of a 1 TB partition very likely takes a few days, even nearly one day if you have identical partitions on 2 HDs and use something like diskcopy for a mirror backup/restore instead of copying the individual files.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SmartFileSystem 1.274
|
Posted on: 2007/8/18 17:22
#1613
|
Just can't stay away
|
I've uploaded a new version of SFS which includes a new format supporting large files, for example you can burn complete DVDs (4.3 GB) with AmiDVD using a partition with DOSType 'SFS\2'. If you still have partitions using the old, non-working SFS 2.x make a current backup and remove SmartFileSystem2 from your kicklayout before installing SFS 1.274, it's 'SFS\2' format is not compatible to the one used in the old SFS 2.x versions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: The Memory Protection Debacle
|
Posted on: 2007/8/15 23:54
#1614
|
Just can't stay away
|
@alexw Quote: Can you tell me what kind of allocation is made with the standard C(++) functions like "new", "malloc" or "calloc"? MEMF_PRIVATE
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: ACK proven untrustworthy
|
Posted on: 2007/8/15 17:43
#1615
|
Just can't stay away
|
@keisangi Quote:
keisangi wrote:
@joerg
oops .. sorry
i didn't notice you said FFS.. i thought you were speaking of SFS.
my apologies.
It was a reply to your Quote: i think programs will get updated to support large files when the OS itself (meaning the Filesystem too) will provide support for it. and therefore can't have been about a file system like SFS/SFS2 which isn't part of the OS. Quote: I hope SFS2 problems will get worked on. I'll fix it, but it will probably take some time since I'm currently working on more important things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Future AmigaOS
|
Posted on: 2007/8/14 18:46
#1616
|
Just can't stay away
|
@TSK Quote:
TSK wrote:
@joerg
Quote:Since I didn't have free HD space for a large enough SFS2 test partition
Hard drives are cheap nowadays you know !
The space was used by partitions using another file system which supports large files without any problems, I don't need SFS2 for that
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Diropus Magellan OS4
|
Posted on: 2007/8/14 18:43
#1617
|
Just can't stay away
|
@TSK Quote: What's the difference between Magellan lister and WB drawer in list view mode ? For example that the WB has no real list view mode, it doesn't display the icons, but it loads them even when using "View by Name" making it much slower in directories with a lot of icons. DOpus reads the directories themself several times faster as well by using the AmigaOS 2.x+ ExAll() (at least DOpus4 can do that, I guess it's the same in Magellan), the workbench still uses the very slow kickstart 1.x method (ExNext()).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Future AmigaOS
|
Posted on: 2007/8/14 18:26
#1618
|
Just can't stay away
|
@keisangi Quote: i think programs will get updated to support large files when the OS itself (meaning the Filesystem too) will provide support for it. Adding support for files > 4 GB in FFS wouldn't make any sense, even by using workarounds (4 KB, 8 KB, or even larger blocks) for one of it's major problems it's not usable for files which are only few 100 MB, let alone files of several GB. FFS was written for floppy disks, using it for something much larger, for which it was never intended, does work after several minor changes (mostly in kickstart 1.x, later changes like the DirCache modes made it even worse), but they only made it usable on large partitions, not for large files nor for directories with a lot of entries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Future AmigaOS
|
Posted on: 2007/8/14 17:37
#1619
|
Just can't stay away
|
@TSK Quote: But you can't buy or download any filesystem supporting big files at the moment. I think joerg removed SFS2 from his website because of big bugs in it (or something like that). Not really big bugs, it doesn't destroy data or something like that, "just" one or two of the 64 bit packets not working correctly. For example AmiDVD doesn't get the correct file size of an image > 4 GB if it's on a SFS2 partition. But that made it quite useless ... Adding a SFS2 workaround in AmiDVD wouldn't have been a problem, but that doesn't help for other software. Since I didn't have free HD space for a large enough SFS2 test partition, just by checking the sources I couldn't find what's wrong, and there was next to no interrest from developers anyway (except for my own software AFAIK lha, DvPlayer and diskimage.device are the only AmigaOS programs which support files > 4 GB, and as long as there is no software which supports large files a dos.library and file system which does is useless) I removed it from my homepage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Switching to SATA - worth it?
|
Posted on: 2007/8/13 2:42
#1620
|
Just can't stay away
|
@tldaley Quote: Ok, I opened up MediaToolbox, klicked on sii3114 and all that shows up is my HD.
Back in the old days all I would have to do is load CD0 into a text editor and change the Device and unit number. It's not required on AmigaOS4 since it's done automatically by diskboot.kmod. Being able to edit a mountlist/DOSDriver file wouldn't help at all, if it's not shown by MediaToolBox the device driver didn't find it and CDFileSystem can't use it either, no matter if an automatic or a manual mountlist is used. Check your U-Boot sii3114 variables, maybe explicitly set the unit of the DVD Burner to CD/DVD instead of auto detection. If that doesn't help set the OS4 command line to "debuglevel=1" (or set the sii3114_verbose U-Boot variable, but I'm not sure about the name, check the docs), do a cold reboot and post the debug output from the sii3114 driver, you can get it with C:DumpDebugBuffer.
|
|
|
|
|
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
