Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!psuvm!barilvm!bimacs!orenalex From: orenalex@bimacs.BITNET (oren alex) Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps Subject: Re: Asking advice on Nortons 5.0 Message-ID: <3106@bimacs.BITNET> Date: 24 Mar 91 14:25:49 GMT References: <1991Mar1.025906.21936@novell.com> <949@keele.keele.ac.uk> <1991Mar18.201351.21366@qua Reply-To: orenalex@bimacs.UUCP (oren alex) Organization: Bar-Ilan University, Israel. Lines: 21 In article <1991Mar21.203934.12497@pdn.paradyne.com> roth@pdntg1.paradyne.com (Mike Rothman) writes: >In article <3068@bimacs.BITNET> orenalex@bimacs.UUCP (oren alex) writes: >> >>Tried to use SD 5.0 on my system (dos 4.01, qemm, 4dos, super-pc-kwik) >>Still looking for some of the files, others got *really* messed up >>90% of the disk is ok - so it does not seem to be a cache problem. > >Did you reboot after you used SD? If you were running any kind of memory/disk >cache, it COULD HAVE messed up SOME files.......the question is, did you reboot >and did you have a cache installed > >If so, that's the problem super-pc-kwik *is* a cache (a damn good one...) 1) i did use a cache and i did-not reboot. However - using the same configuration with SD 4.5 works just fine (but i want to use 5.0 ...) 2) some friends of mine got their files nuked also - no cache, just plain buffers. 3) some talk on bbs'es implied that this is a global problem (bug) norton's guys were notified but they refused to acknowledge this.