Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: TheGoose on August 13, 2011, 08:09:49 PM
-
The archive from Aminet has a bug, missing file not included in the archive or that the script needs to be updated and corrected. Not impressed.
(http://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-TYYZ0v6bY_c/TkbLBNoTvkI/AAAAAAAAAi0/nnue9nzljZg/s720/2011-08-13_14-50-33_705.jpg)
-
If you've got SnoopDos try running that just to make sure the installer is looking in the right place, it could for example in a badly written install script be looking in DH0: and not the current place where you have the archive... (it can & does happen)... ;)
Failing that install SFS (it's much better anyway)... :)
Oops I was trying to click on "Proceed" in the picture there and nothing happened think I need some coffee or a Bovril even... :o
-
I know Franko, but I grow weary of this kind of laziness from developers. I was a software tester for about 5 years and I know they never try anything they just compiled / packaged. And make gross assumptions about what "users" should know or do.
Not my job. And does not inspire much confidence about the other thousand lines of code to follow...
-
I know Franko, but I grow weary of this kind of laziness from developers. I was a software tester for about 5 years and I know they never try anything they just compiled / packaged. And make gross assumptions about what "users" should know or do.
Not my job. And does not inspire much confidence about the other thousand lines of code to follow...
Agreed, but it could just be something (dare I say it) you are doing wrong, whichever the case, it's crap when something like this gets released and something as basic as the installer doesn't work properly, like you say it doesn't inspire confidence... :(
-
It appears that the release archive is missing the DirectSCSI version of the filesystem for 68000/68010 (PFS3/data/#?/fs/#?PFS3ds). If you install on 68020, 68030, 68040 or 68060 system it should work just fine.
Assuming you're running on 68000 or 68010 and want to install you can select the expert mode where you get to choose the CPU type (choosing for example 68020 will bypass the problem). After the installer has completed you can manually copy over the existing 68000/68010 filesystem versions.
Of course this doesn't help the fact that 68000/68010 directscsi version is missing.
-
Yeah it happens, but PFS is considerably better than SFS in some areas. I just wish SFS was updated more often.
-
Yeah it happens, but PFS is considerably better than SFS in some areas. I just wish SFS was updated more often.
It hasn't been updated since 2007 as far as I'm aware and I don't think the guy who took over from the original author bothers with it anymore... :(
Mind you having said that I've been using SFS for many years now and am very happy with it... :)
SmartFileSystem Ver 1.279 (http://strohmayer.org/)
-
What I would use, if it was available would be HFS+ or XFS, both systems are pretty stable and organized.
-
It appears that the release archive is missing the DirectSCSI version of the filesystem for 68000/68010 (PFS3/data/#?/fs/#?PFS3ds). If you install on 68020, 68030, 68040 or 68060 system it should work just fine.
Assuming you're running on 68000 or 68010 and want to install you can select the expert mode where you get to choose the CPU type (choosing for example 68020 will bypass the problem). After the installer has completed you can manually copy over the existing 68000/68010 filesystem versions.
Of course this doesn't help the fact that 68000/68010 directscsi version is missing.
I switched from intermediate install to expert. This got me around the problem and got to choose the 030 version.
Then hit another missing file:
(http://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-wlf3Mm9uECE/Tkbw9-X34vI/AAAAAAAAAjM/ZJLNFm0Yhys/s720/2011-08-13_17-45-04_443.jpg)
-
I switched from intermediate install to expert. This got me around the problem and got to choose the 030 version.
Then hit another missing file:
(http://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-wlf3Mm9uECE/Tkbw9-X34vI/AAAAAAAAAjM/ZJLNFm0Yhys/s720/2011-08-13_17-45-04_443.jpg)
You really need multiuser support? If not, don't select them at install ("Multiuser version" and "DirectScsi Multiuser version"). If you select multiuser versions the installer attempts to patch the *existing* multiuser installation.
-
I don't Piru, I'm just making a point; at this point.
I did get it installed and all my enthusiasm for it is now extinguished.
QA was never a strong point of Amiga I suppose. At least it's in Aminet now where it belongs.
-
I did get it installed and all my enthusiasm for it is now extinguished.
Well too bad. The filesystem really is the best there is.
-
Well too bad. The filesystem really is the best there is.
Not true... SFS is much better (as I've argued before)... ;)
-
Not true... SFS is much better
- PFS3 is faster than SFS (easy to benchmark and verify as a fact)
- PFS3 fragments less than SFS over time (easy to verify as a fact)
- PFS3 has a repair tool, SFS doesn't (except MorphOS SFSDoctor)
- PFS3 is more reliable than SFS (somewhat subjective and harder to verify)
What SFS has going for it is the support for larger partitions than PFS3 (SFS: 128GB PFS3: 107GB)
-
- PFS3 is faster than SFS (easy to benchmark and verify as a fact)
- PFS3 fragments less than SFS over time (easy to verify as a fact)
- PFS3 has a repair tool, SFS doesn't (except MorphOS SFSDoctor)
- PFS3 is more reliable than SFS (somewhat subjective and harder to verify)
What SFS has going for it is the support for larger partitions than PFS3.
You answered that one yourself... ;)
But not one to miss an opportunity then in reply...
1. Cobblers
2. Bollock$
3. Tripe
4. All Of The Above
Oh... and of course the correct answer you so kindly gave yourself... :)
-
So again we're in agreement that PFS3 is superior. Great!
-
So again we're in agreement that PFS3 is superior. Great!
Think you need new goggles... ;)
Should've gone to SpecSavers... :D
(You probably wont get that one, it's a British TV ad...) :)
-
Think you need new goggles... ;)
Nope, I can see perfectly fine that you provided no evidence whatsoever that would change my assessment of the facts. Claims 1, 2 have been proven to be correct numerous times in the past, by numerous different people. Claim 3 is a plain cold fact. But as we well know you won't bother, instead resorting to just making some seemingly witty comments. Some claim we need village idiots, I'd say we can do just fine without.
Should've gone to SpecSavers... :D
(You probably wont get that one, it's a British TV ad...) :)
Oh but I do. We do have specsavers. No, I don't shop my glasses from there.
-
Nope, I can see perfectly fine that you provided no evidence whatsoever that would change my assessment of the facts. Claims 1, 2 have been proven to be correct numerous times in the past, by numerous different people. Claim 3 is a plain cold fact. But as we well know you won't bother, instead resorting to just making some seemingly witty comments. Some claim we need village idiots, I'd say we can do just fine without.
Oh but I do. We do have specsavers. No, I don't shop my glasses from there.
So if you know I won't bother then why do you bother responding (seem a lot of bother to go to when you know I won't bother and you can't be botherd with my replies)... ;)
(Note I said replies, not answers...) ;)
Plus if you "can see perfectly fine" then why do you wear glasses, is it trendy or somefink... :confused:
-
Ok, took my grumpy ass self back to the computer and I'm now formatting my 1st PFS3 partition using the PFSFormat command!
Funny, the author made a cartoon that depicts me almost perfectly, using his software for the 1st 10 minutes, HEHEHEHE :lol:
(http://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-FlI4BQqPVJw/Tkch2OKyM9I/AAAAAAAAAjU/2soO498wMmE/s720/2011-08-13_21-15-09_951.jpg)
-
Hah gotcha... John Anderson my aunties behind... ;)
I'm On Google + (https://plus.google.com/113975820768170548601/posts?hl=en)
https://plus.google.com/113975820768170548601/posts?hl=en
That's definitely a young Woody Allen... I knew it... I knew it all along... :)
Can I have your autograph please... :D
-
TheGoose
You can also add PFS3 to HDtoolbox. Add Filesystem should do it, and It will be CFS0x (depending on if you loaded other FS before it.
-
- PFS3 is faster than SFS (easy to benchmark and verify as a fact)
- PFS3 fragments less than SFS over time (easy to verify as a fact)
- PFS3 has a repair tool, SFS doesn't (except MorphOS SFSDoctor)
- PFS3 is more reliable than SFS (somewhat subjective and harder to verify)
5. PFS3 allegedly multitasks better than SFS. This makes a lot of difference when 2 or more tasks try to access the HD simultaneously.
What SFS has going for it is the support for larger partitions than PFS3 (SFS: 128GB PFS3: 107GB)
Would I be allowed to hook a 2TB drive to my Amiga and PFSformat it into 20 different 100GB partitions?
-
@Piru
i don't get why you still arguing with this "individual"!
People who knows how PFS3 perfoms, will go straight using it, others not.
Don't wast your time... he is here for the only purpose to stir people and to gain post count.
-
@Piru
i don't get why you still arguing with this "individual"!
People who knows how PFS3 perfoms, will go straight using it, others not.
Don't wast your time... he is here for the only purpose to stir people and to gain post count.
No I'm not... :(
Whoopee chalk another one up to me post count... :banana:
PS: I am not an "individual" We am a "collective"... :)
-
i know, my fault. there are many in your brain!
-
i know, my fault. there are many in your brain!
Always room for one more on top... :)
-
I would say that if PFS was updated to support bigger Hard Disks, than it would be no contest as to what to choose. SFS decays, Amithlon really, really hates it and it lacks many modern day features. PFS seems to be the best choice nowadays if you have the HW specs.
@Piru
Was PFS ever successfully ported to MOS natively?
-
I would say that if PFS was updated to support bigger Hard Disks, than it would be no contest as to what to choose.
I guess you mean larger partitions, PFS3 already supports as large HDDs as SFS.
@Piru
Was PFS ever successfully ported to MOS natively?
It works. I've ported the filesystem, pfsdoctor, diskvalid and all the related commands. I'd need to do some more testing, but unfortunately my Peg2 started acting up lately. I've moved my devenv to my 2nd Mac Mini now, but I haven't had much time to work on it lately.
-
Yeah I do, I was really, really tired when I wrote that.
Great, so PFS3 will be on the 2.8 CD? And whats up with the Pegasos, I've been hearing people are having a ton of issues on them nowadays.
-
How big can a PFS3 partition be? Trying to make one now and having some show stoppers...
-
Great, so PFS3 will be on the 2.8 CD?
It will be inside the bootimg, but whether it'll make it to 2.8 remains to be seen. I'll try my best.
And whats up with the Pegasos, I've been hearing people are having a ton of issues on them nowadays.
I guess it's just the age. This particular board is from the first batch so it's quite old already. It works fine for some time but then the IDE bus appears to drop in/out constantly. As if the HDDs would be running out of power (but they're not, I tried with another PSU and it's the same). As I said I've already migrated to the Mac mini so it's no real issue.
-
How big can a PFS3 partition be?
about 106GB
-
Thanks, I had to add the direct PFS3 file system to get my big partition to format, all good now.
I may be crazy but this seems to solve some old trouble with my Deneb setup. I can keep my CPU caches enabled now and run Poseidon now.
I have not installed any boingbags yet and may just keep it that way.
As far as speed goes, I see 0 improvement over FFS. Experiential, not test run.
-
I've seen improvements with PFS3 over FFS and SFS, respectively. In particular, YAM loads folders faster and my drawer with hundreds of PNG icons displays more quickly.
One thing I have noticed, though, is if you enter "version dh0:" against a volume with FFS or SFS you will get the version of the filesystem returned, same if you use Amiga-I on the volume icon. You will not get any return on a PFS3-formatted volume.
I'm not concerned with volume size, at the moment. I have an 18GB SCSI drive in my system and use SMBFS to map a shared drive from a box running RAID. That 18GB drive is obnoxiously loud so I may replace it at some point with a reasonably sized CF with an IDE-to-SCSI or one of those SCSI-CF I've seen floating around.
-
about 106GB
When your work on PFS3 is ready, maybe you can look into addressing those limitations that still exists, and call it "PFS4" of such, so "backwards compatibility" to old PFS3 disks can be ignored with good conscience?
-
When your work on PFS3 is ready, maybe you can look into addressing those limitations that still exists, and call it "PFS4" of such, so "backwards compatibility" to old PFS3 disks can be ignored with good conscience?
It looks like that'll have to be the way. Some of the ways to overcome this limitation have been discussed here: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3285711&group_id=532591&atid=2163218
I really don't like these "lets double the capacity" tricks much, as they don't raise the limit enough really. I think another level of indirection is the way to go.
-
It looks like that'll have to be the way. Some of the ways to overcome this limitation have been discussed here: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3285711&group_id=532591&atid=2163218
I really don't like these "lets double the capacity" tricks much, as they don't raise the limit enough really. I think another level of indirection is the way to go.
Yes, do it as clean as possible...
-
I've seen improvements with PFS3 over FFS and SFS, respectively. In particular, YAM loads folders faster and my drawer with hundreds of PNG icons displays more quickly.
One thing I have noticed, though, is if you enter "version dh0:" against a volume with FFS or SFS you will get the version of the filesystem returned, same if you use Amiga-I on the volume icon. You will not get any return on a PFS3-formatted volume.
I'm not concerned with volume size, at the moment. I have an 18GB SCSI drive in my system and use SMBFS to map a shared drive from a box running RAID. That 18GB drive is obnoxiously loud so I may replace it at some point with a reasonably sized CF with an IDE-to-SCSI or one of those SCSI-CF I've seen floating around.
I had to install IconBeFast, really pitiful how slow 256 color icons load on my system, I guess I must blame the Picasso II. I have right now on my new drive:
A3000 25MHz load of RAM
AOS3.9 8bit screen mode (256C) 1024x768 using Picasso96.
PFS3, of course.
The drive is a Seagate Ultra320 Cheetah.
-
What SFS has going for it is the support for larger partitions than PFS3 (SFS: 128GB PFS3: 107GB)
that's true on paper..
i wasn't able to create a 4 gb partition with SFS, switched to PFS3DS and that worked just fine for me, so i definitely switched to PFS...