Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: LoadWB on December 28, 2016, 08:39:00 PM
-
I am attempting to install a couple of different SSDs into my 4000D. These are KingSpec IDE SSDs, one 64GB and one 128GB, which work just fine in other machines, as well as with USB-to-IDE adapters.
When installing in HDToolBox they do not show full capacity. They are initially seen as their proper capacity in the selection window (minus over-head,) but upon installation the 64GB shows up as 18GB, the 128GB shows as 22GB.
Any advice on adjusting the CHS values to match the proper capacity? Would bad values cause problems in use after partitioning, formatting, and OS installation?
-
What version of scsi.device are you using? I'm using a 128 GB IDE SSD (Super Talent) on my A4000T and it sees the full capacity. I am using scsi.device 43.45 though which helps with larger drives.
http://aminet.net/package/driver/media/SCSI4345p
-
HDToolbox will almost never display correct values of drives bigger than 4Gb.
In general with big drives, set the boot partition to 3900 MB to be on the safe side. Worry about the rest when you've got a working, booting system.
After that, you have to patch serial.device and file systems to make use of big partitions on big drives... very informative read here.
http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=32256
But, if your boot partition will fire up, at least you can get some sort of progress with using the drive as a whole.
Choice of filesystem is important, in that some are more reliable than others. Directory caching is best avoided if your Amiga is not abundant with fast RAM and processor power. I like PFS, but your choices are dictated by what OS you are running.
If they are IDE drives, you will probably have to go with TD64 or IDEFIX solutions, I reckon, to gain full access to their potential storage.
-
What version of scsi.device are you using? I'm using a 128 GB IDE SSD (Super Talent) on my A4000T and it sees the full capacity. I am using scsi.device 43.45 though which helps with larger drives.
http://aminet.net/package/driver/media/SCSI4345p
scsi.device 43.45
-
scsi.device 43.45
Eh...let me correct myself...I've done too many system changes..
I was using a 256 GB SATA SSD with an IDE adapter and IDEFix97 as I had 3 IDE devices (CF-Card, DVD-RW and SSD drive) on the 4-way adapter.
The Super Talent IDE 128 GB SSD drive wouldn't let my A4000D (or T) boot when connected. I have a WarpEngine and purchased a ACard IDE>SCSI adapter and added the 128 GB IDE SSD drive using that to the WarpEngine (the SATA SSD came out as well as the 4-way adapter and IDEFix97, then I updated the scsi.device).
Sorry I had made more changes that I remembered and forgot that the 128 GB IDE was never on the A4000D/T's IDE controller.
The 256 GB SSD (sata) did work as a 128 GB drive (IDEFix97 size limit) on the A4000's IDE port though (with IDE>SATA adatper)....but that was scsi.device version 119 or something like that (IDEFix97).
-
Yeah, part of my problem, as well, is going to be remembering all the cool things I installed on my CSMKIII SCSI system. I will probably wind up doing a IDE-SATA adapter with a SATA SSD, but I was hoping to use the smaller IDE SSDs I have (I have a 32GB which would be more than plenty.)
BUT, it seems something may be squirrely about these IDE SSDs. I am hoping that is not the case that it is simply something I am doing.
-
I have a question for you about this?, did you first try to set up each section of the disk to 2Gb for each section of the hard drive?. It may work. Just try it and put every thing down on paper as your notes?.
-
I have a question for you about this?, did you first try to set up each section of the disk to 2Gb for each section of the hard drive?. It may work. Just try it and put every thing down on paper as your notes?.
I am not certain what you mean by "section of the hard drive." I can partition the drives fine. The default creates many 8GB partitions, the first of which I size to 2GB to avoid any potential problems. The problem I am having is the size of the disk itself during installation is not showing the size as detected. I will try to get a screen grab to show.
-
I am attempting to install a couple of different SSDs into my 4000D. These are KingSpec IDE SSDs, one 64GB and one 128GB, which work just fine in other machines, as well as with USB-to-IDE adapters.
When installing in HDToolBox they do not show full capacity. They are initially seen as their proper capacity in the selection window (minus over-head,) but upon installation the 64GB shows up as 18GB, the 128GB shows as 22GB.
Which HDToolBox version are you using? Would that be the Workbench 3.5/3.9 version or the original Workbench 2.x/3.x version?
I am asking because the Workbench 2.x/3.x version (that would be V39; the partition size calculation code changed very little since the Workbench 2.x release of HDToolBox) may not correctly display partition sizes greater than 4 Gigabytes. The calculations which yield the partition layout generally work correctly, it's just that displaying the sizes of the partitions is flawed. These problems cover both displaying the size as numbers ("2000 Meg") and showing the sizes and positions of partitions as clickable/movable blocks. Don't click on and resize these partitions: select the partitions using the left/right cursor keys, then change their positions/sizes by editing the number of cylinders (lower left corner of the window) instead.
The layout calculations are based upon the number of cylinders involved, which is mostly safe. For display the number of cylinders need to be multiplied by the number of sectors per cylinder and the number of bytes per sector (the HDToolBox V39 user interface refers to sectors as "blocks"). The result of that calculation easily overflows with storage devices in the >4 Gigabyte range, resulting in wildly implausible partition sizes.
I wrote "mostly safe" and "generally work correctly" because HDToolBox V39 may stumble when choosing the "default disk layout", which involves creating two partitions of equal size for the medium. You might get better results by manually deleting one partition, tweaking the size of the remaining partition by editing the number of cylinders allocated for it, then repeating the process after adding another partition.
Any advice on adjusting the CHS values to match the proper capacity? Would bad values cause problems in use after partitioning, formatting, and OS installation?
As far as I can tell you should not deviate from the number of cylinders, heads and blocks per track which HDToolBox "divines" by probing the drive.
It pulls together the drive's properties from three different sources of information, any of which may be somewhat "off". Historically, this was done because for some 10-15 years hard disk manufacturers were prone to create wonky firmware which reported incomplete, inconsistent or plainly wrong information about the drive (the HDToolBox code is chock full of profanity, cursing various hard disk vendors; most of these went out of business or were gobbled up in the decade that followed, so maybe those curses did have an effect after all). I guess that pattern now repeats with SSDs, as it did with each innovation that came to the mass storage market in the 1980'ies and 1990'ies (fast SCSI, notebook drives, IDE, wide SCSI, ATA, etc.).
So anyway: HDToolBox V39 will err towards making reasonably consistent size figures when setting up the disk's size. These calculations take into account that the drive may reserve part of the medium for its own use (e.g. for bad sector remapping), or may report the number of sectors available as a figure which doesn't match the number calculated from the cylinders/heads/sectors.
This code tends to work out OK, as far as I can tell. It may not give you everything which the medium is supposed to provide, but it's certainly safer than trusting a drive which claims in one set of data that there is storage space available which cannot be accessed, according to a different set of data produced when probed.
-
Ah, that is a good question which I punch myself for leaving out. I am using HDToolBox provided by a 3.9 Emergency Boot disk set. I am pretty certain this is a non-BB CD but I will get the version output of HDToolBox when I get back to the 4000 later this morning. I had originally tried using the 3.1 installation disks but v39 refused to acknowledge a device was present at all.
I actually have not proceeded with the default detection, yet. My concern was the ridiculous difference between the size of the device and what HDToolBox said was its capacity. I certainly do not want to only be able to use 20GB of a 128GB drive, even if I will never have that much stuff on this computer :)
-
Ah, that is a good question which I punch myself for leaving out. I am using HDToolBox provided by a 3.9 Emergency Boot disk set. I am pretty certain this is a non-BB CD but I will get the version output of HDToolBox when I get back to the 4000 later this morning. I had originally tried using the 3.1 installation disks but v39 refused to acknowledge a device was present at all.
I actually have not proceeded with the default detection, yet. My concern was the ridiculous difference between the size of the device and what HDToolBox said was its capacity. I certainly do not want to only be able to use 20GB of a 128GB drive, even if I will never have that much stuff on this computer :)
I just recalled that there may be another punch line here: the drive may report its size differently with respect to how it is asked.
The ATA scsi.device may receive an answer fit for a disk controller as present in an early 2000's PC. Back then the size of a sector was 512 bytes, and this is no longer the case with today's SSDs. Also, the number of sectors per track, etc. was much lower than what we use today.
Hence, the SSD may report its properties skewed towards "compatibility".
-
The whole disk device driver + filesystem of OS3.x needs an overhaul... again, lol :p
-
The whole disk device driver + filesystem of OS3.x needs an overhaul... again, lol :p
It's not that terrible, or at least it didn't get much more complex and confusing since 2001.
The disk driver API still supports disks of up to about 1 Exabyte. Partitions larger than 4 GBytes are still unwieldy and the FFS still scales poorly in terms of performance when used on partitions of that size.
Same old, same old...
-
Yes, and with larger disks comes the unavoidable disk errors, bit-flips and so on, that needs to be handled somehow. And TRIM, UNMAP functionality for SSDs... soon enough drives will be replaced completely by various NVM solutions etc, interesting time ahead :)
-
I just recalled that there may be another punch line here: the drive may report its size differently with respect to how it is asked.
The ATA scsi.device may receive an answer fit for a disk controller as present in an early 2000's PC. Back then the size of a sector was 512 bytes, and this is no longer the case with today's SSDs. Also, the number of sectors per track, etc. was much lower than what we use today.
Hence, the SSD may report its properties skewed towards "compatibility".
hrmmmmm maybe setting the sector size to 4096?
Yes, and with larger disks comes the unavoidable disk errors, bit-flips and so on, that needs to be handled somehow. And TRIM, UNMAP functionality for SSDs... soon enough drives will be replaced completely by various NVM solutions etc, interesting time ahead :)
TRIM support for modern SSDs would be nice. In the beginning I recall some SSDs had what was essentially auto-TRIM to support OSes and filesystems which did not support TRIM, and I suspect that IDE SSDs, with their target being older systems, do as well.
-
Have you tried configuring the drive under WinUAE on a fully updated/patched OS 3.9 setup?
Version reports HDToolBox 45.6 (2/13/2002) that I had used.
Maybe install the drive under that and see if they show up correctly.
I also am using PFS_AIO instead of FFS.
http://aminet.net/package/disk/misc/pfs3aio
I did my drive setups that way, then used a "fresh" WinUAE config to install the OS's (3.1/3.9).
I had a updated and patched WinUAE build of OS 3.9, and just added the drives via an external USB cable with SATA and IDE connections + power.
-
Per my post in another thread, I am deliberately not using WinUAE for this project. I have never used it, anyway, so I would have to work that up, too. My intention is to be able to use the native tools to achieve my goals, illustrating short-falls and solutions as I go. It's a challenge, and I'm already "cheating" by using a 3.9 boot set :D
-
Okay, I attached what I'm seeing with the 128GB SSD and what happens if I accept the default parameters. If I change the block size to 4096 it only comes up to 88GB.
EDIT: If I set cylinders to 65536 and blocks per cylinder to 4096 I get 128GB exactly, but that is more than the detected size of the device.
-
128 GB or 128 GiB? :)
https://www.google.com/#q=convert+128+GB+GiB
-
Either way, the number in detection does not match the number in installation, and I would like to think the program is consistent.
-
Either way, the number in detection does not match the number in installation, and I would like to think the program is consistent.
It is. Find out the true total number of blocks and increase the number of cylinders until the displayed number of blocks matches the true one as close as possible. In order to keep the number of cylinders small I would also change the number of heads to 16 so that you get 4096 blocks per cylinder.
You can use this program to find out the true total number of blocks: http://thomas-rapp.homepage.t-online.de/downloads/hddreport.lha
-
It is. Find out the true total number of blocks and increase the number of cylinders until the displayed number of blocks matches the true one as close as possible. In order to keep the number of cylinders small I would also change the number of heads to 16 so that you get 4096 blocks per cylinder.
You can use this program to find out the true total number of blocks: http://thomas-rapp.homepage.t-online.de/downloads/hddreport.lha
Nice. And the work begins.
-
Well, it is after all an SSD, not a spinning disk :p
-
Nice. And the work begins.
Your photo looks like SCSI.device is 43.35 and not the latest patched 43.45
-
30333 cylinders * 16 heads * 256 sectors = 124243968 sectors
Matches exactly, no wasted sectors at the end. And partitions aligned to 2-megabyte boundaries should meet all alignment requirements.
-
Your photo looks like SCSI.device is 43.35 and not the latest patched 43.45
Yeah... something got screwy there. I'm going to have to try again.
30333 cylinders * 16 heads * 256 sectors = 124243968 sectors
Matches exactly, no wasted sectors at the end. And partitions aligned to 2-megabyte boundaries should meet all alignment requirements.
What's the blocks-per-track setting need to be? I found some parameters change spontaneously as I'm entering. Eh. I'm done for the year. Going home, leaving this at the office and I'll be back on Tuesday. Going home to my working CSMKIII SCSI system :) Thanks for the help, I'll get back on it after New Year.
-
"heads" = tracks per cylinder
"sectors" = sectors per track
sectors per cylinder = heads * sectors
So:
Cylinders = 330333
Heads = 16
Sectors per Track = 256
Sectors per Cylinder = 4096
-
For what it's worth, and for those using OS 4 on any of their machines, the boot floppy has a version of scsi.device that is >52. I use this on all my classic machines.
Version >NIL: scsi.device 52
If Warn
LoadResident DEVS:A1200/scsi.device reboot quiet
EndIf
Suddenly, the second channel on the internal IDE adapter and other nice little benefits are usable on the system.
-
"heads" = tracks per cylinder
"sectors" = sectors per track
sectors per cylinder = heads * sectors
So:
Cylinders = 330333
Heads = 16
Sectors per Track = 256
Sectors per Cylinder = 4096
*forehead slap* Oh, duh. I tried a little bit different values and am having problems. My 3.9 installation is missing some stuff, and the 3.1 installation said (never did before) that my 2GB partition didn't have enough room for Fonts. I'll try again Tuesday.
For what it's worth, and for those using OS 4 on any of their machines, the boot floppy has a version of scsi.device that is >52. I use this on all my classic machines.
Version >NIL: scsi.device 52
If Warn
LoadResident DEVS:A1200/scsi.device reboot quiet
EndIf
Suddenly, the second channel on the internal IDE adapter and other nice little benefits are usable on the system.
Yeah, I completely forgot that I had done some customization to my boot floppy but then re-made it. I had the patched scsi.device on there, but now I am curious about the OS4.1 scsi.device, and particularly surprised it is 68k. But then I guess the system has to boot 68k then hand over to PPC, right?
I'm assuming one of the benefits is less confusing size issues, but what others?
-
My 3.9 installation is missing some stuff
More details needed.
the 3.1 installation said (never did before) that my 2GB partition didn't have enough room for Fonts.
Then the partition is bigger than 2GB. For 3.1 everything above 2 GB is negative. Put some big files on the partition so that free space shrinks below 2 GB. After installation these files can be deleted.
I'm assuming one of the benefits is less confusing size issues, but what others?
A new scsi.device does not fix bugs in HDToolbox and other programs, therefore size issues won't change.
-
Thomas is right. The scsi.device seems function both better as well as provide functionality such as exposing the secondary IDE device on a chained cable but it will not patch tools with rendering and math bugs like HDToolbox. :-\
-
Right, right, I was not thinking problems with HDToolBox, but that it would support TD64 as well as NSD (but then again, isn't NSD the preferred one over TD64?) and wasn't detecting larger drives a problem with scsi.device. Not seeing the calculated sizes properly, but just seeing the drives period.
In any case, my partition was 1.8GB (supposedly) and the installation reported not enough space for Fonts, and after the 3.9 upgrade, in particular, resource.library is missing. Some functionality is broken, as well, but I was in too much of a hurry to really remember which -- my thought was, the installation was broken to begin with as evidenced by the Fonts problem.
I have to re-install the drive with proper geometry, anyway, so everything on it is a lost cause.
But I'm not going to have it in-hand again until Tuesday. I *may*, however, work with my CSMKIII system with a SCSI-to-IDE/IDE-to-SATA adapter to install an SSD in that. Maybe. Have to upgrade my Core2Quad to a Gen7-i7 this weekend, too. So much to do, so little time.
-
The scsi.device v52 seems to sort out a lot of the wonkiness I needed other tools for and it is loaded resident. So imho it's a win-win. Your mileage may vary but so far it has treated me well
-
The scsi.device v52 seems to sort out a lot of the wonkiness I needed other tools for and it is loaded resident. So imho it's a win-win. Your mileage may vary but so far it has treated me well
Worth the purchase, then. I have been debating and convinced myself out of buying OS4.1 until I actually get a PPC accelerator. This gives more support to the side of "buy now."
-
scsi.device from 4.1 works with 3.9?
-
Remember I used gvpscsi.device with HDtoolbox in WB2.05 but it couldn't detect my 500mb scsi hdd but no problem with an old 50mb one.
So I used the GVP floppy installation utility and detected without problem.
-
scsi.device from 4.1 works with 3.9?
Yes, the scsi.device FROM THE BOOTFLOPPY !
-
Today was taken up by a dead server and its replacement and errands before I left town... and I have, so I will get back to this in a couple of weekends.
-
scsi.device from 4.1 works with 3.9?
Yes it even works with 3.1. The one from the boot floppy. Additionally the atapimajik file from devs: and the cdmounter util from c: on the same floppy will easily mount any attached ide CD-ROM. ;) Merry Christmas. Two files for easy and fairly complete cd-rom drivers is also pretty damn awesome.
-
Always check the c,l,s,devs,libs and fonts directory of every bootable. Tons of treasures to be found.
-
Always check the c,l,s,devs,libs and fonts directory of every bootable. Tons of treasures to be found.
Pretty good advice. Although it's more dirt than nuggets... most of the time.
I'm not TOO surprised about a .device file running retroactively, on an earlier release. Hardware device drivers are like software libraries for hardware outside of the core basic computer system - so they are more tied to the extra hardware then they are to the core.
Mind you, I must admit I rarely tried this, except as a last resort. Seems counter intruitive. And it doesn't always work, because sometimes the extra hardware is tied down to a further OS by library use or another factor, which is bound to the core in some way.
-
The correct CHS numbers helped, but not totally. No matter what I have tried, OS3.9 will not correctly install on this KingSpec 64GB SSD. I am going to try the 128GB but I have no reason to be confident of success over the 64GB.
I created a 1GB partition at the beginning of the drive with no other partitions. Formatted this QUICK with FFS 45.9. The installation of 3.1 completed with no apparent problems, but 3.9 installation missed icons, libraries, and probably more without any errors during the installation. I tried performing an installation of 3.9 from the 3.9 emergency-boot but I get the can't get Workbench information error.
-
but 3.9 installation missed icons, libraries, and probably more without any errors during the installation
I had a problem with 3.9 once that was missing files, this was due to a dodgy CD. Possible to try a different installation media? Although AFAIR it did throw errors when it encountered scratches on the CD...
-
The correct CHS numbers helped, but not totally. No matter what I have tried, OS3.9 will not correctly install on this KingSpec 64GB SSD. I am going to try the 128GB but I have no reason to be confident of success over the 64GB.
I created a 1GB partition at the beginning of the drive with no other partitions. Formatted this QUICK with FFS 45.9. The installation of 3.1 completed with no apparent problems, but 3.9 installation missed icons, libraries, and probably more without any errors during the installation. I tried performing an installation of 3.9 from the 3.9 emergency-boot but I get the can't get Workbench information error.
Make sure you have the right max transfer speeds setup. I was getting random write errors and crashes on my A1200 without it. I think it's 0x01fe00 but double check that elsewhere first.
-
Checked that, too. Even worse, I just took a CF card and without re-initializing it just partitioned and formatted and lo, the upgrade from 3.1 to 3.9 is corrupt. Like Mike, I think I could be dealing with a bad 3.9 CD. I don't know, but at this point I've spent several hours across three drives. I'll try again next week.
-
One slight variation I would try - first setup the drive with HDtoolbox. Get that done properly. Then shut down all active systems to power off.
Power on, try the install of OS. Some HD types you had to do this, otherwise the drive itself got confused about its own geometry. Maybe with design of SSD, you have to do this, because the old geometry is cached locally on the drive, and you have to zap that with a power off, and then do a cold boot of the drive to make sure the old geometry isn't messing with the new one.
Some drives are just a bit TOO smart like that, and you kind of have to make them into dumb idiots with the whole procedure. After they're setup they are fine. You just can't install an OS on such systems without a cold boot after they are prepared, paritioned etc.
Always use quick format option on solid state media. No point using low level format, that's the drives responsibility with solid state tech. No analog stage is required, the data isn't physically bits of magnetism fuzzily arranged on an disk area anymore.
-
I used different media, combined with the proper CHS settings in HDToolbox I got OS3.9 working on the 64GB SSD, as well I can now copy large files (400MB to the SSD) with no problems. I have a few quirks and things to do remaining.
Hitting RAmiga-E to bring up the "Execute" requester causes the system to crash. This actually happens with the original load of the OS which came with the computer. Mind, it was probably loaded from the same good media.
I'm going to work to identify the BoingBag level tomorrow to see what needs to be installed. I am pretty sure it's an original release of OS3.9 considering the "AmigaOS ROM Update" is v44.26, but what I found interesting is the bad media gives me the installation option of installing over 3.0, while the good media installs over 3.0/3.1. Maybe it is a BB1 media?
So far everything is working well. Using hddreport (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=818419&postcount=21) to get the proper settings for HDToolbox seems to have fixed the problem of moving large amounts of data over to the SSD. (Yes, for the n-tieth time I did check MaxTransfer at ever load.)
At this point I have MUI3.8 and Poseidon installed (RapidRoad on X-Surf 100.) Oh, and FBlit and FText. Tomorrow if I have time I will install Roadshow and DOpus and try out some WHDLoad games (currently extracting from USB.) Probably wouldn't hurt to update some MUI classes and install WarpDT datatypes. I'm using an Indivision AGA MKII and once everything else is stable I'll install my new VA2000.
I think I need a "fresh load" FAQ to help me sort additional enhancements I should install. I remember a while ago I posed a question about that, I'll try to dig that up.
One nasty little thing niggling me is my 3640 is a Rev 0. Haven't decided if I should do anything about that (other than regret ever selling my WarpEngine 4040.)
Thanks to all. It looks like my original problem is resolved!
-
Maybe it is a BB1 media?
They didn't make a "BB1" media, just an initial release and a "SE", with some fixes to the installer script. Source: http://www.gregdonner.org/os39faq/installtips.html#17
Boing Bag 1: http://os.amigaworld.de/download.php?id=4
Boing Bag 2: http://os.amigaworld.de/download.php?id=5
Some additional FAQ's and optional locale updates: http://os.amigaworld.de/index.php?lang=en&page=12
Boing Bag 3/4: http://amigan.1emu.net/releases/BoingBags3&4.lha
Boing Bag 3/4 readme and changelog: http://amigan.1emu.net/releases/BoingBags3&4.readme
There's lots of install videos on YouTube but here's my crappy one from a few years ago:
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCMw8bStvG4
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufCuW--Q2nA
It may be of some help to you, if you can get through my rambling. ;)
Have fun! :)
-
They didn't make a "BB1" media, just an initial release and a "SE", with some fixes to the installer script. Source: http://www.gregdonner.org/os39faq/installtips.html#17
Ah, well then!
Boing Bag 1: http://os.amigaworld.de/download.php?id=4
Boing Bag 2: http://os.amigaworld.de/download.php?id=5
Have these stashed away. Good to have a mirror :)
Some additional FAQ's and optional locale updates: http://os.amigaworld.de/index.php?lang=en&page=12
Boing Bag 3/4: http://amigan.1emu.net/releases/BoingBags3&4.lha
Boing Bag 3/4 readme and changelog: http://amigan.1emu.net/releases/BoingBags3&4.readme
There's lots of install videos on YouTube but here's my crappy one from a few years ago:
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCMw8bStvG4
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufCuW--Q2nA
It may be of some help to you, if you can get through my rambling. ;)
Have fun! :)
Oh, ugh, rambling? C'mon, man, you met my short attention span! :P I'm not certain about BB3 and 4, honestly. Yeah, I know a lot of people swear by them but I'm still not sure about taking the plunge.
Something I thought about today on the way home is using the Cloanto 3.1 floppies to see if those will recognize large hard drives to install a big SSD without having to resort to the 3.9 disk set before installing 3.1.
I'd like to do this from the ground up with as little secondary (non-Amiga) machinery as possible. I don't suppose using a 3.9 Emergency Boot Floppy is too bad since it is made by another Amiga.
Good night!
-
:D
I swear by the 3.9 ERD personally, although the Cloanto disks might work if they also have CD drivers (to detect the 3.9 CD in the drive) and an updated HDToolbox (to prep the new HD).
The changelog for BB 3/4 is all out there in the open, it's not like it does some "big secret thing" to somehow screw up people's machines. IMHO most of the people who have trouble with it are because they have a system that's been running 3.9 + BB1 & 2 for years, then try installing 3/4 over top of that. You've got all different versions of stuff from god-only-knows-where, that's a problem. But doing a fresh install of 3.9 immediately followed by 1, then 2, then 3/4, like the authors intended, shouldn't give you any problems.
G'nite! :)
-
BB1 installed with a little fuss over the Installer (same as mentioned in the thread OP, actually.) I installed Installer v43 by mistake and all hell broke loose.
According to this post (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=312780&postcount=2), my good installation media is the SE release. All is still going very well.
-
I figured that I would share the fruits of our labor here.
-
I figured that I would share the fruits of our labor here.
Nice setup! Lots of good modern hardware goodness in there. :)
I see you have one of those new MNT graphics cards. Guy who's making them recently posted on Facebook that he's about to produce another batch. How do you like it? Are you using something like a Ratte monitor switch to switch between the output of the card and your Indivision?
-
Nice setup! Lots of good modern hardware goodness in there. :)
I see you have one of those new MNT graphics cards. Guy who's making them recently posted on Facebook that he's about to produce another batch. How do you like it? Are you using something like a Ratte monitor switch to switch between the output of the card and your Indivision?
I have not yet been able to use it as I have not yet installed P96 and its driver. I plan to use a regular HDMI switch or monitor with multiple HDMI/DVI inputs, at least at first. Ultimately, if things work the way I hope, I can get an automatic HDMI switch with a priority input pretty inexpensively. I have not checked out Ratte's monitor switch but will have a look (maybe I have and just don't remember.)
Eventually I will likely swap around parts from my now two 4000D systems depending upon the outcomes here. My other system has a CSMKIII with a Deneb (which I *really* like for the boot flash) and a PIV, and it will soon have a UWSCSI->IDE adapter for an IDE SSD or UWSCSI->IDE->SATA for a SATA SSD. I *love* my PIV, but if an Indivision and VA2000 work as well as I hope then I might move it over to my A2000 in place of the Spectrum 28/24.