Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Dariusz Piatkowski

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 80
1
Applications / Re: ANPM - YUM error. [Errno 256] No more mirrors to try
« on: January 28, 2023, 11:20:11 pm »
Martin,

It looks like netlabs repo is off line, you could always try the AOS mirror => "https://www.2rosenthals.com/rpm.netlabs.org/release/$releasever/$basearch/"


2
Hardware / Re: Some successful installs with ArcaOS 5.0
« on: January 28, 2023, 11:14:53 pm »
It might depend on the controller. I used to have an Lenovo Thinkpad x121e. I needed to switch the SATA Controller to compatible mode as in ahci mode no drive was found using ArcaOS 5.04 (i do not have this Laptop anymore so i couldn't test with more recent versions.)

On my motherboard, which is a AMD 890FX and SB850 chipset, I couldn't get the AHCI driver to work reliably. It would find the SSD, no problem there, it would access it just fine...however periodically the machine would literally freeze...no response, everything stopped, this would last for about 5-10 secs, after which time it would then proceed to run once again.

I tried to narrow this down to either my JFS cache settings, or driver parameters, heck, even played with the motherboard ports I was connecting to...never established the root cause, so I gave up on trying to get AHCI working here.

As to the speed comment...I'm not sure that it's any faster actually. The testing I was able to do showed exactly the same results, however, I will say that the system 'response' seems to be improved, and that's precisely what AHCI can deliver, after all it re-arranges the drive commands in such a way that the hardware itself delivers the information faster. This is normally very pronounced when dealing with spinning disks since the amount of head movement is minimized, and that in turn allows for a more efficient retrieval of data from the disk. SSDs on the other hand don't seem to benefit from this as much, at least that was my experience while I was playing around with it.

Bottom line: you need to test your hardware, and if you are running AOS and encountering problems do report this to AN by logging an Issue, it's the only way to improve the software by making the authors aware of the issue.

3
Hardware / Re: Some successful installs with ArcaOS 5.0
« on: January 28, 2023, 11:06:02 pm »
...
ArcaOS 5.07 is not the holy Grail, we have OS/2, eComstation and Arcaos Users here. Any Hardware Information is welcome!
...
For myself I am using a pimped up OS/2 4.52 Version on Hardware, Arcaos 5.07 wont even Start the Installation. But that does not mean, that my OS/2 is the best around.

This Forums live because we have all flavours of OS/2 here, ArcaOs is just one of them, the most modern and the one I would suggest for a new User.

I couldn't have said it any better Sigurd.

The 'ArcaOS or Bust' mantra is a perfect example of what I would call "group think". Don't get me wrong, if you are NEW to OS/2 platform AOS is probably THE way to get your feet wet...heck, not even "probably", I would in fact say it is THE way to do so!

However...plenty of us here are running on old hardware (as well as some new stuff) and using the older versions of OS/2...most likely Warp4 derived/based stuff though.

Therefore, I would also encourage the sharing of your experience...others may, and most probably will, benefit from it, any by chance you may in fact get some hints and pointers on how to address whatever issue you may be running into!

4
Applications / Re: Creating an OS/2 image from HDD
« on: January 23, 2023, 05:20:01 am »
Hi Dave,

...Which reminds me Dariusz, you posted a bunch of chkdsk flags earlier, could you repost them?

here is what I have:

Code: [Select]
Check FS content
 
  Usage: chkdsk drive: [/A] [/B] [/C] [/D] [/F[:n]] [/O] [/P] [/V]
 
    /A      Enable autocheck mode (undocumented)
    /B      Perform LVM Bad Block List utility processing only
    /C      Process ifdirty after logredo
    /D      Enable debug mode (undocumented)
            all log messages written to stdout in english
    /F[:n]  Full check
            0 => read only (default)
            1 => prompt for permission for each repair
            2 => preen (default if n omitted)
            3 => Assume permission given for all repairs.
                 If exiting with clean file system, invoke LVM Bad Block
                 List utility processing on the way out.
            Note: :1 and :2 are converted to :3
    /O      Omit logredo (undocumented)
    /P      Enable pmchkdsk mode (undocumented)
    /V      Verbose messaging (ignored)
 
  Both / and - prefix supported
  Options are case-insenitive
 
  Called as
 
    chkdsk drive: /F /A [/C]
 
  for autocheck

5
Applications / Re: Creating an OS/2 image from HDD
« on: January 23, 2023, 12:26:02 am »
Hi ivan,

Have you considered creating two partitions on your new enlarged SSD leaving your boot partition at 200 Gb (which is excessive for a boot partition, mine is 2 GB with over 1 GB still free) and putting tools, programs, etc on the remaining partitioned space?

What I currently have is the legacy of having installed my original OS/2 Warp3 way back when in the early 1990s I think...LOL...yeah, it's been that long!

Several upgrades later (such as Warp4 for example), with all of my apps having been installed on the same drive as the boot drive I simply do not have the desire to split into the arguably much better approach you suggest.

I figured that if AOS is ever released in UPGRADE mode I'll take that plunge, until then I simply manage what I have.

Therefore in my case I could replicate the 200G drive in as-is layout, and just have the extra 300G left for other uses, maybe move some storage from the boot drive to that one?

The challenge/problem with splitting the SSD into such partitions is that I'm not certain it actually gains anything in terms of performance. It is still the same hardware and having the extra empty space on a SSD is actually a good thing (think overprovisioning).

As is, I will have my current 200G drive which will become that storage space and it being a separate hardware device allocates the full channel to just those disk IOps.

6
Applications / Re: Creating an OS/2 image from HDD
« on: January 22, 2023, 07:26:34 pm »
This may be a silly question you guys, but can the DFSee created image (is it DISK or PARTITION?) be restored onto a differently sized TARGET?

What I mean is the following:

1) I have a 200G SOURCE (current OS/2 partition on a SDD)
2) I have a 500G TARGET (future OS/2 partition on a NEW SDD)

Can I used DFSee image of the SOURCE to "move" my whole system to the ned SDD?

FYI - I have been looking at doing either the old fashioned XCOPY thing, or RSYNC, or DFSee...was aware that some such DFSee functionality existed, but I haven't investigated any of it. Perhaps DFSee could actually do a real-time copy???

Thanks!

7
Storage / Re: JFS - chkdsk LOG - where?
« on: January 14, 2023, 11:14:05 pm »
Hi Dave!

Yup, booted to my MAINT partition and manually ran a CHKDSK against all the JFS drives. Only one reported errors, and that was the backup of the MAINT partition, so low risk.

Given that I do nightly backups I was able to run a quick compare between the drive listings afterwards and narrow this down to about 10 different files (all over the place though, so not just a single directory).

Anyways, that allowed me to fix the issues and get my machine back up to a fully functioning status.

But man...not to have visibility to what JFS CHKDSK does is a scary feeling...why isn't it producing a CHKDSK.LOG like HPFS did? Strange since running 'chkdks drive: /p' will even show the MSG statements for each check operation and that's primarily the sort of stuff that HPFS used to log into the LOG file.

8
Storage / JFS - chkdsk LOG - where?
« on: January 14, 2023, 06:58:33 pm »
Hi Everyone,

Umm...something strange happened to me this morning: I was editting my RSYNC LOG file so I could archive the 2022 stuff and start new for 2023. Needless to say, the file is about 25M in size...so plain vanilla editor just takes a little extra time.

I had done this with the good ol' trusty E.exe before, but I figured I would give AE a try (v1.9.x). Editing went fine, no faster than E.exe, however once edited EA hung trying to save it back to the disk. I waited, and waited, following which I tried to kil EA, no go though. Rolled out the full gamut of kill options, still no go.

Ultimately I selected the Reboot option from CAD-Popup as EA was literally blocking WPS (nothing else worked), but even than hung. So as a final attempt to recover I did CTL-ALT-NUMLCK x2, which put me in the dump screen, and then I reset.

Now, in the past, that desparate attempt to recover has always worked. It also has NEVER caused me a JFS issue, however this time...man...upon reboot the JFS CHKDSK went to work full-time...pile of stuff scrolled by (too fast of course to see any of it) and machine came back up. INIs were corrupted, no problem, I have regular backups, so a couple of reboots later I was back up and running.

However, not liking that longish list of CHKDSK results I went fishing to learn more about it.

As it happens I have the following in my STARTUP.CMD:

Code: [Select]
...
chklgjfs g: >> g:\tmp\log\chklgjfs-g.log
...

which is done for ALL the drives.

In my case, this produced the following:

Code: [Select]
____________________________________________________________________
chkdsk service log selected:  MOST RECENT

XCHKLOG P superblock is valid.


**********************************************************


CHKDSK  processing started: 1/14/2310.56.1

CHKDSK parameter detected:  AutoCheck mode

CHKDSK parameter detected:  IfDirty

CHKDSK  The current hard disk drive is:  g:

CHKDSK  DosOpen(...OPEN_SHARE_DENYREADWRITE|OPEN_ACCESS_READWRITE...) returned rc = 0

CHKDSK  DosDevIOCtl(...DSK_GETDEVICEPARAMS...) returned rc = 0

CHKDSK  Primary superblock is valid.

CHKDSK  The type of file system for the disk is JFS.

CHKDSK  The boot sector has been refreshed.

CHKDSK  Filesystem is clean.

CHKDSK  All observed inconsistencies have been repaired.

CHKDSK  Filesystem has been marked clean.

CHKDSK **** Filesystem was modified. ****

CHKDSK   LVM GetBadBlockInformation returned rc = 22

CHKDSK  processing terminated:  1/14/2310.56.1   with return code: 0.

____________________________________________________________________

The problem here is that this doesn't tell me anything about WHAT actually was detected and what JFS did to attempt to correct it.

Sure enough...as I attempted to fire up a few of my regular apps like PMMail for example, I came to discover that those directories have missing files, etc.

So clearly there is a JFS problem here, and as opposed to HPFS where the HPFS CHKDSK log viewer would at least clearly show the objects that were impacted, it would appear that JFS has no such functionality.

How can that be though? I must be missing something...

So how are you guys getting visibility into what JFS CHKDSK log has found and/or corrected?

BTW: Nothing in \lost+found directory, so no actual directories or files were recovered...

9
Nope, not using any virtualization.

For a while it was getting hard to continue running on bare metal...but I would say that changed over the last few years as the multi-core CPU software solutions have matured.

Therefore, while I am certainly giving up a bit of flexibility (not running the 'latest & greatest' hardware), I simply prefer to run just OS/2.

...and to address the gap(s): well, simple RDP connection to a Win box that does all the other stuff for me. Given the awesome functionallity of solutions like FreeRDP, which literally allows me to run a Win machine based software side-by-side with my native OS/2 apps, on the native OS/2 platform, I plan on continuing that way.

Umm...OK, maybe a hardware upgrade would be nice...I mean who doesn't get a kick out of setting up a new box with all the bells and whistles????

10
Web applications / Re: Google Photos - cookie problems anyone?
« on: January 11, 2023, 04:36:17 am »
Thanks Dave for giving this a quick "go".

Well, trying this out on my "Testing" profile worked...so the culprit is certainly my current "production" profile...now comes the joyous activity of finding out what actually is the problem.

I did go through a quick trial'n'error run of purging all Google cookies & cache...that did NOT get me the result I was hoping for. So it could very well be one of the add-ons...grrh...

11
Web applications / Google Photos - cookie problems anyone?
« on: January 10, 2023, 02:59:57 am »
I don't frequently hit the Google Photos here, but occasionally - usually when I just took some photos of car work I'm doing and need to file-away, or share in a forum - I do. It's always been pretty easy, typically I select what I want, clinck 'Download' and off it arrives here as a ZIP file.

Well, not sure if this is another "nail" in the coffin or purely my client only problem, but as of the other day (could have happened earlier if this is a Google change that's impacting us) I am getting the following error when attempting to hit my photo collection:

Code: [Select]
We've detected a problem with your cookie settings.
Enable cookies

Make sure your cookies are enabled. To enable cookies, follow these browser-specific instructions.
Clear cache and cookies

If you have cookies enabled but are still having trouble, clear your browser's cache and cookies.
Adjust your privacy settings

If clearing your cache and cookies doesn't resolve the problem, try adjusting your browser's privacy settings.
If your settings are on high, manually add www.google.com to your list of allowed sites. Learn more

I've of course gone through the whole cache/cookies purge...strangely enough following such a purge the site becomes accessible again. However, the minute FF is re-stated I'm back to square-one.

It almost feels like the cookies Google Photos may be using either aren't being saved, or something during FF re-start is wiping them out?

I am using using uBlock and NoScript, but neither one has caused me this problem before. I'm going to test with a clean profile next...

Has anyone encountered this?

12
Applications / Re: Software Wishlist for 2023
« on: January 07, 2023, 08:13:56 pm »
...As a community, we need developers. People to back the work of Paul, David, the folks at BWW, etc. The very first thing new developers want is a friendly development environment.
...
There should be a single 'awesome ArcaOS' git(Hub,lab) with everything you need to get up to speed with a tested stable development kit. That means OpenWatcom 1.9 and gccand all the environment scripts sorted out and standardized, a modern editor... and I know someone can take a few hours to set up by themselves. Bullshit. It's just yack shaving and non-productive.
...
But I tell you the developer experience is currently very opaque, cumbersome and error-prone.
...

You have captured what has been the Achilles Heel of trying to get any DEV work done on our platform.

The old stuff (say VAC 3.08/3.65/4.0) has been largely abandoned (although it also seems like equally undeserved treatment), while the newer stuff (say latest GCC, etc.) isn't spelled out anywhere as to how it maps onto our OS/2 platform. I'm talking here stuff like: how does the IBM OS/2 Dev Toolkit mix with the generic GCC stuff? Should one keep these separate, or combined? How is RPM part of all this?

In summary: we have a minefield of a DEV environment! Who wants to take a trip through that when the "skull and crossbones" warning sign is staring you right in the face? Yeah...those who enjoy doing that sort of a thing (me included), but it makes for an insurmountable obstacle for everyone else.

Beyond this...even with all the right tools, etc, etc. being available, you still need someone to lend you that "helping hand". We get this here on the forum, but what would go extremely far would be having an 'OS/2 Dev Class' organized, where on let's say weekly basis we would all do an on-line session to plug away through some coding examples...basically, a modern-day on-line course!!!

This could tackle things like:
1) What IDE environments are available?
2) What compiler/library/runtime environments are availble?
3) What are the basic pre-reqs one must acquire before coming to the "big boys" table, that being: get some basic C/C++ experience, understand OS/2 pecularities such as "..xxx..."
4) Sample Project
5) Sample Project Debugging
6) ...you get the idea?

So until that happens we simply will not develop any extra DEV "bench strength", which will eventually kill the platform.

13
Hi Rich!

I ONLY want to change the font size for the Drives/Drive/Folder WPS objects...I do not want to modify anything else.

To change the default font used by the WPS for icon titles and details-view text, edit os2.ini->PM_SystemFonts->IconText.
The default is normally 9.WarpSans but at 1920*1080, 10.WarpSans is more appropriate, particularly if you use Xview a lot (it always uses the default).

Great advice...tried this, results being:

1) ALL folders were changed, so not just the Drive child folders but ANY folder present everywhere
- I understand why given the INI key, but I only wanted to change Drive child folders

2) the TREE view was not changed, I'm not sure if this is a XWP side-effect though?
- this setting remains as 9.WarpSans, is there another GLOBAL settings somewhere else that changes this?

Thanks!

14
Setup & Installation / Re: Virtual memory, a curious phenomenon
« on: January 06, 2023, 03:29:00 am »
Dave, everyone...
Hi Dariusz, there's something weird about your mem -v output if you have 8GB installed, your "Total physical memory" should show close to 8GB with "Additional (PAE) memory" showing about 4GB.
...

Not sure what happened there, other than a few neurons clearly missfiring on my part...grrh...sorry, my post is of course blatantly incorrect. Thank you for pointing that out.

15
Hardware / Re: Hardware Compatibility Wishlist for 2023
« on: January 05, 2023, 05:21:24 am »
...I may start a new thread for this, but this is my list of choices for screen resolution

640x480
800x600
1024x768
1280x1024
1600x1200
1920x 1440
3840x2160

Notice that only the last one is a wide-screen.

...but then you'd be missing 1920x1200 (WUXGA Resolution), which is a pretty standard resolution for the taller displays.

Here is what I would propose instead (as far as just the higher resolutions go):

1) HD (720p) - 1280 x 720
2) HD (1080p) - 1920 x 1080
3) WUXGA - 1920 x 1200
4) 2K - 2560 x 1440
5) WQHD - 2560 - 1440
6) HD - 3840 x 2160
7) 4K - 3840 x 2160
8) 5K - 5120 x 2880

...all of this courtesy of https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wuxga-resolution-definition,5774.html

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 80