Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: Englyst on December 21, 2004, 11:02:37 PM

Title: Problems with installing SFS
Post by: Englyst on December 21, 2004, 11:02:37 PM

Hi folks.

First post here. And I've got a little problem.

I have just put a new Seagate 80 GB IDE disk on my internal IDE controller on my A4000. I was pretty sure I couldn't utilize everything on it, but that's what I had to work with.

I've downloaded SFS 1.230 and installed the filesystem in the RDB of the Seagate. It reports the drive as 75.9 GB size, but I can only use ~27 GB of it. Which is enough :D

But I never get any icons up on the Workbench for any of the new partitions. I've followed the SFS_OLD.guide since that was what I could find regarding installation documentation.

My config:

A4000/040/2MB Chip/16 MB Fast
Kickstart 3.1 (using Kickflash OS4)/OS3.9 with BB2
Mediator 4000 Pro
Voodoo5 5500 PCI
Realtek 8139D NIC

Can anyone help me out here? Would love to use the new disk.

Thanks in advance.

Title: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Englyst on December 21, 2004, 11:39:06 PM

Hi folks.

I hereby grant myself the stupidity award. Seems like it works now.. DOH! I'll test it before I make a final judgement :-)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to everyone here!

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Minion on December 21, 2004, 11:45:00 PM

Sometimes If I am stuck at something I have to ask somebody else for help.  Whilst I am asking I often realise the answer while still asking the question.  Seems I am not the only one :D

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Englyst on December 22, 2004, 12:03:14 AM

Nope.. Must be the weather :-D

I'm hoping that the Catweasel II that I've ordered will make the rest of the space on the HD available. Anyone know if this is the case?

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Englyst on December 22, 2004, 01:15:08 AM

Ok, a little update. I cannot see any of the new drives (installed OS3.9 on one of them) when holding down both mousebuttons to get in the boot menu. So I can't boot from the new drive.

I can see all the drives when I'm on the Workbench. What can be wrong here? I've set the 500 MB partition as bootable and a priority of 4. My old SYS: partition has a priority of 3.

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: adolescent on December 22, 2004, 05:35:22 AM

Is the boot partition in the first 4G of the disk?  Are you running the standard (SETPATCHED) SCSI.DEVICE or a utility like IDEFIX?

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Englyst on December 22, 2004, 09:09:54 AM

The boot partition is on the first 512 MB of the disk. And I'm running the standard setpatched scsi.device.

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Framiga on December 22, 2004, 10:32:44 AM

blocksize?

use 512 bytes per block.

oh . .  and use SFSFormat (not the system Format)

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Englyst on December 22, 2004, 12:46:41 PM

Blocksize is 512, and I tried using SFSformat but it crashes every time! Depending on how I set up the partitions it would see the partitions or it wouldn't. Freaky..

Tried to format with OS3.9 format command and it worked, but looks no faster than FFS. Using SFSCheck I can see that it reports the partition as ok.

I'll post the SFSCheck results later when I'm home.

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Vincent on December 22, 2004, 02:10:40 PM

Hmmm, shouldn't formatting a SFS device with WorkBench's format command return a "Not a DOS Disk" error?

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Englyst on December 22, 2004, 03:03:46 PM

If that's the case something with the setup is wrong. Anyone know of a screengrabber util that I can use? Then I'll put  some screenshots of my config in HDToolBox online.

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: Vincent on December 22, 2004, 03:34:52 PM

I use QuickGrab (http://uk.aminet.net/aminetbin/find?quickgrab)

Small and easy to use :-)

Title: Re: Seems like I fixed it
Post by: adolescent on December 22, 2004, 06:14:57 PM

Quote

Englyst wrote:
Tried to format with OS3.9 format command and it worked, but looks no faster than FFS.

SFS won't be much faster than FFS on the standard IDE.  This is due to limitations of the hardware (lack of DMA, faster PIO modes, etc.).  In fact, on my A1200 the FFS (with DirCache) is slightly faster than SFS using the onboard IDE.

I don't think SFS was designed to be much faster, just safer, more efficient, and with more features.