Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/03/18/15:29:01
gfrajkor AT rideau DOT carleton DOT ca (George Frajkor) writes:
> Stacker 4 is much better than DoubleSpace, but I would not say
> that earlier versions of stacker have any advantage over DS. What's
Possible... An explanation can come if you open the file
DBLSPACE.BIN in a word processor and count the word 'STAC' in it...
But there are 9 compression levels in stacker 3.12 and 1 in DS (AFAIK);
and the 6.22 version (DriveSpace) is less efficient - one says -
because of a trial losed by M$ against Stac.
> the problem with having to install DS from Dos 6.2?? My understanding
> is that it is automatically present in that program.
Not automaticaly activated - this was not yet the 'virus' period of M$.
> Unless OpenDOS 7.01 differs significantly from Novell Dos 7, from
> which OpenDOS is derived, the version of Stacker built into it is 3,
3.12
(...)
> Not that Stacker 3 is bad, mind you. Just that 4 gives more
> compression and operates faster and has fewer problems.
Mmmh...
>
>
> Now some questions and a hint:
>
> I posted questions to several groups asking for a workaround to the
> insoluable loop problem that Stacker 4 has with lost clusters,
> probably because of an alligator Microsoft built into MSdos 6.22
> deliberately to screw up Stac.
>
> The problem arises when Stacker's CHECK program discovers some lost
> clusters and tells you it cannot repair them. It tells you to use
> CHKDSK, the usual DOS program. CHKDSK tells you that you have to use
> SCANDISK, which is allegedly better, more reliable, etc.. SCANDISK
> tells you it cannot repair the problems while Stacker is running and
> that you should use the utility that came with Stacker, namely, CHECK.
> Bingo. Full circle with no repairs and no hope of ever making them.
But CHKDSK/F works, even if there is a message recommending SCANDISK !
(at least in M$-DOS 6.22)
> By trial and error, and remembering my old Novell DOS 7
> experience, I managed to work around this. The CHKDSK program in ND7
> is different from CHKDSK in MessyDos. It is even physically much
> larger (about four times as big). So I dug out my old ND7 disks,
> dumped CHKDSK from MSDOS and copied in CHKDSK from ND7. It worked
> fine. It is obvious that Novell had no interest in breaking Stacker
> whereas Microsoft did. One more reason I will try my best never to
> use Microsoft products.
Your computer will thank you.
>
> I presume that OpenDOS uses much the same CHKDSK as ND7, so this
> workaround may be of some use to others.
>
> I would appreciate hearing from anyone who has worked with OPenDOS
> and can compare it with ND7 (which some say was a downgrade from DR
> Dos 6).
Compared to M$-DOS:
- the tools (FC,DISKCOPY,...) and their explanation are more professional
- there is a setup program
- the piping works correctly with batch files
- the multitasking mode is nice but the DMPI with it hangs with
DJGPP or GNAT compiled programs (i.e. these compilers, Quake, ...)
so I disable it.
G.
- Raw text -