Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 13:28:01 +0100 From: Philip Nienhuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [LIB] When EZ-Drive is a >must< for W98 * W2K installations
Matt Hanson wrote: <long snip> > > I did download the Ranish Partition Editor some time back for some reason, > but never used it. I'll check it out. > > I guess we're still not certain about just what caused my system to go > belly-up attempting to transfer files from one <8GB partition with W98 on > another <8GB partition to a data partition >8GB. And whether or not the > lack of overlay played any part. I've still got EZD installed at this > point, and haven't experienced any crashes transferring files since. The point is, using PM and EZD and OS-specific stuff introduces too many variables. I like to keep things simple, that has helped me a lot. I am convinced that EZD and PM & some partition editor should somehow work out fine together, but OTOH from your and other list members' postings I conclude this turns out to be much more complicated than the methods I have used. > But I >am< having a very odd problem related to files on the 110. Many of > my Winamp M3U ASCII playlist files just don't work on the 110 anymore. The > problem files don't specify a full path to the MP3 file, but a relative one > that omits the root x:\MP3s folder in the path. All MP3s and M3U files are > contained in sub-folders of x:\MP3s, and are all backed up on the desktop. > M3Us with relatve paths like \Pop-Rock\REM\REM_XXXXX.mp3 work fine with > Winamp on the desktop. But all my MP3 programs on the 110, Winamp, > Foobar2000, an the MP3 playlist/tag software Gearvolt, report errors trying > to find the same files on the Libby when they load the problem M3U files. > Can't help to think there's some connection to the 110 crash a few weeks > back. > > I'm tempted to start over, but I don't know if I'm ready for another ordeal > like the recent one any time very soon. And I'm not quite sure which of > the many routes to follow might be the best course of action. Acknowledged. Just make sure you got good back-ups of your data. > One thing I stumbled on by accident related to the long file name thing > happened when the W98 OS on my desktop crashed last week. I skipped the > defalt DOS scandisk procedure, and ran scandisk from Windows as I've always > found it takes less time. But it discovered a folder with recovery data > made quite a while back when I had to plug one of my Lib HDDs into the > system and run Phoenix. Scandisk announced that it couldn't repair the FAT > table for the file because the path to the file was over >259< characters. > What's wit that number? 260 is the maximum path length on Windows 9x. Did you make the path in Win2K? Or, sometimes DOS gets confused and makes endlessly long path names with repeating subdir names inside, e.g., ....\subdir1\subdir2\subdir1\subdir2\subdir1\subdir2\subdir1\subdir2..... etc > I don't think I'll ever understand all the various methods the different > OSs use to report and record files information. You're not quite alone.... Happy 2005, Philip
