Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!netcom!raj
From: raj@netcom.COM (Roger Lee)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.msdos
Subject: Re: Loading SCO-Xenix on a IBM-Compatible.
Message-ID: <1991Apr15.064906.3638@netcom.COM>
Date: 15 Apr 91 06:49:06 GMT
References: <283@raysnec.UUCP> <36cwZ1w164w@techsys.uucp>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 32

berk@techsys.uucp (techsys consulting) writes:

>shwake@raysnec.UUCP (Ray Shwake) writes:

>> barton@holston.UUCP (Barton A. Fisk) writes:
>> 
>> >Try installing DOS 3.3 or lower on the clone first. Seems I remember
>> >reading somewhere that Xenix doesn't like DOS 4.x partitions
>> >on the same disk.
>DOS 4.01 is not only so brain dead that it doesn't understand itself,
>things it creats are unknown to the rest of the "old world".  It's
>not just big partitions, it's the basic boot record.  Go back to 3.3
>or earlier and low level format the disk.  Then chunk in *nix and dos 4.
>Or you >could< spend the time and $$ for a newer version  :)

Ah how true. But the version isn't what Unix/Xenix is gagging on. You 
can be running a device driver (SpeedStor or Disk Mangler for instance) 
under an 'acceptable' version and Xenix still won't like it. It's the
partition size that matters. If you keep your C: drive at or under 32 megs,
you're ok no matter what version of DOS you're running (I'm running DOS 5 
Beta 432 and have had no problems whatsoever).

but you're right......4.01 is drain bammaged.


-- 


/=========================================================================\
|| I'm not under the alkafluence of inkahol that some thinkle peep I am. ||
|| It's just the drunker I sit here, the longer I get.                   ||
\=========================================================================/