AMIGA-aktuell-Forum
1. More opinions about BoingBag3.9.1-Review and several Solutions for Problems (by
Christian Aichinger)
Well, it seems, my review angered several AmigaOS betatesters, even though I never
intended to. The addendum for BB1, which appeared in the last edition, perhaps gave the
impression to some readers that I do not rate the OS3.9 update highly. But this is not
true. I am very content with OS3.9 and the BB3.9.1 has filled my expectations nearly
completely.
Concerning the contents of letters to the editor, I want to state that I publish letters
always (if they follow the rules of common taste and if I have the permission to do so)
and I do not censor them (at the most I may comment on them). That the letters published
in the last addendum threw discredit üupon the BB3.9.1, may have been caused by my
request in the review of BB3.9.1 to report problems with the update and, if possible,
point out solutions. That only three readers came forward is more an argument for the
quality of the BoingBag than against it.
Michael Christoph <michael@meicky-soft.de> sent me a mail answering some of my points of
criticism. My commentaries are enclosed in square brackets.
Here is his mail:
> Hello Christian,
>
> there still are enough pirated copies of AmigaOS around, that it must
> not be additionally facilitated for those people. Only for
> this reason is the "AmigaOSUpdate" file protected and needs the original
> AmigaOS CD. Because the most important system components are available
> in the update archive, they could be copied over a 3.1 installation
> and any possible user could refrain from "correctly" buying the CD!
[On one hand you are right. But then the protection against piracy is minimal. An
ambitious cracker will have few difficulties with a password protected ZIP file.
Furthermore it is no problem to install the BoingBag with help of a pirated OS3.9 CD. If
the "common" OS3.1/OS3.5 user installs parts of the 3.9.1 update on his system, it cannot
be compared with a correct standard-installation of the OS3.9. Wholly apart from the
completely incorrect localisation this "hybrid OS" will show more than curious
behaviour.]
> Quote: "But then you must recognize the quick reaction of AMIGA Inc.
> to bug reports and the release of the update."
>
> I wish to make it clear to the last of your readers, that AMIGA Inc.
> only is the orderer, and has not contributed a single line for the
> new AmigaOSes! I want to point out that it is only because of Haage & Partner,
> that so fast a BoingBag has been released, or that there is an
> AmigaOS 3.9 at all.
[This is correct. Of course I should also have mentioned Haage & Partner and the members
of the AmigaOS teams. But in the end AMIGA Inc. was responsible for the release of the
BB3.9.1 and not those whose job it was to program it.]
> P.S: I do not believe, that AMIGA Inc. will ever call you to tell
> you that a new BB has been released ;-) But readers of the Amiga
> Magazine had already read in the May edition (appeared on April 2nd)
> an extensive report of the novelties (all non-subscribers should think
> of there own failings and cry, that they don't know anything)!
[I did not expect at all a personal notification from AMIGA Inc. A notice on the
homepage, that the first release of BB3.9.1 was not completely free of bugs and was
replaced by a reworked version, would have been sufficient for me. That a "goofed" 1st
release should not be made publicly known, is clear to me and to every reader. But such
an information policy is a bit silly. Mistakes can happen to everybody. After all we are
all human beings ;).
That the Amiga Magazine is supplied with information directly by members of the
AmigaOS3.9 team, must be seen under a completely different aspect. As far as other Amiga
publications and their readers are concerned, it must be called unfair. If an editor of
another Amiga publication consults a beta-tester or a responsible person, he mostly is
brushed off with the indication, that they are committed to the NDA (Non Disclosure
Agreement) and are not permitted to make any statement about the status of development.
In spite of NDAs, the Amiga Magazine is given the information and the user who wishes to
be informed about the state of affairs is forced to buy the Amiga Magazine (or better, to
subscribe to the periodical "PCgo").]
> To me nothing is known of a freezing AsyncWB, but I must admit,
> that I rarely copy over the Workbench.
>
> To Mr. Schomberg goes the question, why programs are started in the
> User-Startup file with help of WBRun and not just with RUN? The only
> difference is, that WBRun simulates a double-click on the program
> icon and by this the Tooltypes are evaluated. But every good program
> can be configured just as well via command-line options.
[Please read more on this concern farther down in the text. Gernod Schomberg
<G.Schomberg@t-online.de> and Michael Christoph together have researched this problem.]
I received another letter about perceptions of problems with the installation of a new
AmigaOS or update from Wolfgang Hosemann <whose@t-online.de> (OS3.9 beta-tester as well).
I (with permission of Wolfgang Hosemann) will publish this letter only in part, because
some parts of it are not meant for the public or are a misunderstanding. Here comes the
mail:
[Snip...]
> Therefore I'd like to hand in some advice:
>
> If a Boing-Bag is to be installed, boot from the Emergency-Start disk!
> This is well defined and clean, in any case (it is arranged in a way,
> that it really should run on any possible hardware combination. There
> are exceptions, though, but those really are rare). If then problems
> arise, they are more easy to allocate.
>
> Avoid patches, even if they run unexceptionally with OS3.9. This
> was mentioned already at OS3.5, that there is no warranty of cooperation
> of OS updates and patches of the system software. This warning was not and
> is not issued just for fun!
>
> Don't bash right-away upon the people who are developing
> the OS. These people do their best to supply you with really good
> and stable software. Because the market 'Amiga' is ridiculously small,
> things do not work offhand and certainly not in one go. Windows even
> more has ripened with user feedback (topic: banana-ware!). For compensation
> the makers of OS3.9 readily are on your side with word and deed, and
> this even free of charge.
>
> You should publish this advice in your magazine. so that people may get
> it who in general do not read instructions and ReadMe-files. By the
> way, there is an additional information supply, which permanently is
> updated.
>
> In case of doubt go to www.gregdonner.org, possibly there you will find
> the solution for the problem, or ask Greg directly. He is extremely
> helpful and tries his best to solve problems and to make solutions
> available for everybody. As far as I know he always is in touch
> with the OS-team, to be able to push for a remedy or at least for
> a work-around for recognized problems.
>
> Regards
> --
> Wolfgang Hosemann
[Wolfgang in fact had consented to furnish a reworked commentary for publishing.
Unfortunately because of the time factor it didn't come off. But he told me several
additional addresses and help facilities for problems. These you can read in the next
mail:]
[Snip...]
> I think, we leave it that way. Certainly soon there will be the
> opportunity, that I can publish my visions concerning OS3.9 and the
> solution of problems connected with it in your magazine (if I still
> will be welcome ;o) ).
[Of course you are ;)!]
> As a little help for the time to come you again could name the well
> known addresses for problems. There is the OS3.9-Support at Haage &
> Partner. As far as I know, Martin Steigerwald is responsible for the
> support. Unfortunately he is up to his eyeballs with so
> many different tasks, that there is not much time left for the support
> itself (meaning: With unique problems he has not the time to find out
> the reason. This mainly are the problems that did not show up during
> beta-testing, because they are due to special hard/software combinations).
>
> If any reader has a problem with removable disks, which
> definitively can be traced to OS3.9, then he should call on me. Mostly,
> I do support for STFax, but once I had a problem with OS3.5 and
> a ZIP drive and the support couldn't give me any help. Now I know all
> about it ;) But the same applies for problems connected with PFS3 or
> SFS.
>
> To all others I further recommend the OS3.5/3.9-FAQ by Greg Donner.
> There lots of things appear which over and again are asked for or
> have caused problems. I have reliable information that soon some
> questions about WBRun will be seen there and with this of course the
> answers as well ;)
>
> Apropos: One of your readers in the meantime found out what his
> problem with WBRun was and he made a corresponding proposal for
> improvement, which certainly will be implemented.
>
> You should not try to start programs with WBRun, before the
> workbench.library (or the Workbench) has been opened. For good
> reasons this cannot work. However, the error message in this case is
> meaningless and leads nowhere. As far as I
> know, they are already working on the correct reaction.
>
> Well, this was it for me. We'll hear (read) of each other!
>
> With best regards,
>
> Wolfgang Hosemann
Gernod Schomberg in an addendum to the BB3.9.1 review had mentioned the problems with the
new WBRun command and AsyncWB. As I wrote, this led to a common troubleshooting. I do not
want to keep back the two mails of Gernod and Michael. Here is the mail from Michael
Christoph:
> Hi Christian,
>
> now I have investigated both the error causes with Gernod. Here are the
> results:
>
> WBRun cannot launch programs without the workbench.library, which is
> only activated when the Workbench runs. Therefore it is in principle
> not possible (and this never was intended) to start programs from the
> User-Startup. Solution: Use "system-hacking" WBRun (e.g. from Fish Disk
> 757) or normal RUN.
>
> AsyncWB works faultlessly - here the problem is the Workbench as well.
> There is no solution until now - but Olaf Barthel will look into this
> matter more deeply. By the way, the problem is the duplication of files
> in the same partition - from one partition to the other multi-copy is
> possible without problems.
> Solution: Duplicate files/drawers one by one (even if I cannot
> understand, why copies should be created in the same partition).
And here the mail of Gernod:
> Hello Christian, (Your message from 12-May-01)
>
> after several messages to and fro we have reached a satisfying result.
> Michael Christoph recognized what had caused the deficiencies I had
> encountered, and found some more, which I was not able to see.
> For instance, he had sent me a not yet published version of "WBRun",
> which regularly aborted with "Datei nicht ausführbar" ["File not
> executable"] on my computer. After several questions and answers he
> sent me the file, now packed together with "SnoopDOS", which indeed
> I already had in a later version, and this "WBRun" responded correctly.
>
> I already had prepared an answer, in which I had enclosed both WBRuns
> with different names, for a test I unpacked them and now both of them
> worked alright! Now I checked the originals and found out, that they
> only differed by the protection bit "e", which was set in one version,
> but not in the other! The packers had manipulated the protection bit.
>
> Michael was quite baffled that this is a problem in OS3.9, for
> until now the ability to execute a program was determined only by
> the start-bytes of the program itself. And the reason, why the new
> "WBRun" does not run out of the "User-Startup", apparently is, that
> the WB is not opened yet and with this the appropriate library not
> active.
>
> He also handed over the matter with the multi-copy of files inside
> a directory to other programmers.
>
> So again the gentlemen have something to think over,
>
>
> With best regards,
>
> Gernod
Concerning the reworked version of WBRun: Users with problems with this new command
should report to the support addresses named above (and additionally collected at the end
of this text) and just ask for a reworked version. As you can conclude from the
commentaries, the members of the OS3.9 team are ready to help with problems. To report a
problem still is the task of the user. The members of the OS3.9 support still are not
"clairvoyants" ;).
Finishing, I'd like to express that it was not a simple task to collect all letters,
which I had received, into a common (con-)text. But I hope I could condense the answers
in a satisfying way and must not write another addendum ;).
Sources for the OS3.9 Support:
AmigaOS3.9-FAQ:
http://www.gregdonner.org/os39faq/os39faq.html
AMIGA, Inc. (Collection of several support sources):
http://www.amiga.com/3.9/support.shtml
Haage&Partner:
http://www.haage-partner.de/aos39/support-d.html (German support site)
http://www.haage-partner.de/aos39/support-e.html (English support site)
Christian Aichinger <christian@aakt.de>
Forum