chapman@pavepaws.berkeley.edu (Brent Chapman) (06/17/86)
I upgraded to PC-DOS 3.2 about a week ago. I'm having a major problem, however. If I stop a program with a ^C, everything appears fine, but there is about a 75% chance that sometime during the execution of the next two or three commands, the whole system will simply hang. No garbage, no error messages, no beeps, no NOTHING. Just dead. It has to be power-cycled to restart it. That is a pain, even on an AT. I won't even THINK about installing it on our PC while it's doing that. I need some help. Has anyone else encountered this? Are there any fixes? I've already reallocated 'STACKS' in my config.sys, but that doesn't seem to have any effect. I know there was some discussion on this a month or so ago, but I went on vacation just as things were getting warmed up, and the articles had all expired by the time I got back. Thanks! Brent -- Brent Chapman chapman@pavepaws.berkeley.edu ucbvax!pavepaws!chapman TANSTAAFL! (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch!)
coulter@hplabsc.UUCP (Michael Coulter) (07/01/86)
>> >> In one of the computer centers here there is an HP-VECTRA >> running DOS 3.0 (plus HP Compatibility 1.0) and in DOS it will completely >> lock up, as you described, if you hit ^C or CTRL-BREAK. I'm running DOS 3.1 on an HP-VECTRA and have no problems with ^C. -- Michael Coulter ..hplabs!coulter
hsgj@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Dan Green) (07/01/86)
In article <661@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU> chapman@pavepaws.UUCP (Brent Chapman) writes: >I upgraded to PC-DOS 3.2 about a week ago. I'm having a major problem, >however. If I stop a program with a ^C, everything appears fine, but >there is about a 75% chance that sometime during the execution of >the next two or three commands, the whole system will simply hang. No >garbage, no error messages, no beeps, no NOTHING. Just dead. It has to >be power-cycled to restart it. That is a pain, even on an AT. I won't >even THINK about installing it on our PC while it's doing that. > >I need some help. Has anyone else encountered this? Are there any fixes? > > >Thanks! > >Brent > >-- > >Brent Chapman >chapman@pavepaws.berkeley.edu >ucbvax!pavepaws!chapman > >TANSTAAFL! (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch!) In one of the computer centers here there is an HP-VECTRA running DOS 3.0 (plus HP Compatibility 1.0) and in DOS it will completely lock up, as you described, if you hit ^C or CTRL-BREAK. Sorry, I don't know why. By the way, if you are running KERMIT or some other program, you can ^C all you want, no problem. Its only in DOS that it screws up... Actually I am surprised since usually HP stuff that I've used has been pretty good. Not having ^C is a real pain, though. -- Dan Green ARPA: hsgj%vax2.ccs.cornell.edu@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu ~~~~~~~~~ BITNET: hsgj@cornella UUCP: {decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!cornell!batcomputer!hsgj
mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP (07/02/86)
DOS 3.2 hangs with a "fatal system error" or something like that, when it gets enough control-C or any other interrupts. (I posted an extract from an article in PC WEEK (april) about this before) The problem is that 3.2 will no longer recognize more than a certain number of interrupts without specifically being told to. I believe (if I recall correctly) that the default value is 9, or something equally absurd. This is a particularly nasty design error, since it will only cause your system to crash when you're doing something **interesting** and fun. There is a crufto fix IBM proposed. I forget the exact syntax, but there is another of those semi-documented parts in the dos manual that tells you you can set the number of interrupts yourself in your config.sys file. Try grubbing through the manual or tech ref, or better, get hold of the PC WEEK article. I'm sorry I've forgotten the facts on this, but I hope this has shed some light. I was so disgusted by the whole thing I degenerated my system to 3.1 again. Only IBM would think they could get away with such a stupid blunder. (anyone else would be out of business) Not only does 3.2 blow up every so often, but as far as I can tell it offers a whole mess of services that are only useful to networked ATs (someone please flame me if I'm wrong) :-) and the new version is slower and more RAM hogging than 3.1 (which was more RAM hogging that ..., etc...) Unless you plan to hook nifty toys to your AT it might be a good idea to sit back and wait for the next version... *sigh*... -- *All opinions expressed aren't even mine, let alone those of Gould, Inc.*
werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner) (07/04/86)
> In article <661@ucbcad.BERKELEY.EDU> chapman@pavepaws.UUCP (Brent Chapman) writes: > >I upgraded to PC-DOS 3.2 about a week ago. I'm having a major problem, > >however. If I stop a program with a ^C, everything appears fine, but > >there is about a 75% chance that sometime during the execution of > >the next two or three commands, the whole system will simply hang. No If it means anything, I occassionally get this bug with DOS 2.0, except it only happens during a Ctrl-C while printing, followed later by the random hang. Who knows, maybe 3.2 made the special case bug into a general bug. I always blamed it on my printer interface. Is there any screwy hardware floating around? -- Craig Werner (MD/PhD '91) !philabs!aecom!werner (1935-14E Eastchester Rd., Bronx NY 10461, 212-931-2517) "When I was your age, I always did it for half an hour a day."