SCOUG-HELP Mailing List Archives

<< Previous Message << >> Next Message >>

Date:	Wed, 7 Nov 2001 13:37:22 PDT
From:	"mrakijas" <mrakijas@oco.net >
Reply-To:	scoug-help@scoug.com
To:	<scoug-help@scoug.com >
Subject:	SCOUG-Help: trap e cause

Content Type: text/plain

=====================================================
If you are responding to someone asking for help who
may not be a member of this list, be sure to use the
REPLY TO ALL feature of your email program.
=====================================================

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Steven Levine"
Reply-To: scoug-help@scoug.com
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:06:22 PDT

>In
><200111061939265.SM01236@dialup-63.212.137.49.dial1.losangeles1.l

evel3.net>,
>on 11/06/01
> at 07:41 PM, Michael Rakijas said:
>
>>Then which do I go with - the fix that overrode my fix or do I

backlevel
>>to redo my fix?
>
>You go with the fix that fixes your problem. Install 8621 and

then
>backout the two problem .sys files to the 8620 level. That way

get get
>all of the 8621 fixes with without the known problem of 8621.

That is where I was. I had applied 8621, which gave me the
problematic SOCKETS/AFINET and now I've backleveled to the 8620 as
you suggested/provided. Now, what happens if a subsequent fix is
needed that replaces the SOCKETS/AFINET that I have. One has to
presume that the newer SOCKETS/AFINET addresses problems that
other parts of the update may need to be fixed, no? Do you go
with the SOCKETS/AFINET of 8620, of 8621 or of the new ones?

>>Ah, but that's where I am now. I didn't go with 4.1 et al. and

I've got
>>a bit of a Frankenstein now. Because of the relative agony of

the
>
>You keep saying that and I don't understand why. WR_08621 is a

supported
>FP for TCP/IP 4.0. It just so happens to have a problem with

dial up
>connections. If you had DSL, you might not even know the defect

existed.

Maybe, but I did have the problem, I had localized it to SOCKETS
and since I had applied 8610/8621 directly, I really didn't have
anything to backlevel to and didn't know whether that was the
right thing to do (I certainly wouldn't have known to include
AFINET in the mix, even if I had). Meanwhile, IC27649 and IC27255
have still newer SOCKETS/AFINET files. Are you saying that there
is no problem in including the same file name sets in two
different fix trees, MPTS and TCPIP? Look, I'm an OS/2 fan as
much as anybody but not everything that is done on it is done
wisely. This might be one area where things could be a little
crisper, no? In regards to my earlier answer, the dilemma on
which SOCKETS to use is already present - a newer but unsupported
SOCKETS (from IC27649 or IC27255) of more recent vintage with
presumably fewer bugs or staying with the older SOCKETS that fixes
my current dialer problem with whatever latent bugs/warts it has.

>>happier now than I was before. It's that sense of foreboding

that I
>>have.
>
>Like the guy in the old Andy Capp comic strip?

More like Pogo.

>Steven

-Rocky

______________________________________________________
Sent via the oco.net WebMail Server

=====================================================

To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-help".

For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".

=====================================================

Return to [ 07 | November | 2001 ]

SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group. OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation. All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.