Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!peregrine!elroy!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sm.unisys.com!csun!solaria!ecphssrw
From: ecphssrw@solaria.csun.edu (Stephen Walton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: rad: versus vd0:
Summary: Depends on what you want (don't it always?)
Keywords: rad:,vd0:
Message-ID: <372@solaria.csun.edu>
Date: 23 Nov 88 17:37:23 GMT
References: <894@tank.uchicago.edu>
Reply-To: ecphssrw@roger.csun.edu (Stephen R. Walton)
Distribution: na
Organization: California State University, Northridge
Lines: 25

In article <894@tank.uchicago.edu> arxt@sphinx.uchicago.edu (patrick  palmer) writes:
>
>	1. Was vd0: as flexible as it appeared to be to the naive user?

Yes.  The ASDG-RRD is really a very good product, though I know Andy Finkel
isn't too fond of some of the things it does with the system free memory
list (the reason vd0: is trashed by FastMemFirst is that it gets its ram
from the END of the free list, which FastMemFirst makes the 0xC00000 block
complete with destructive detection).

>	2. Is there a good reason to use rad: instead anyway? (I do not
>	   need it for autobooting.)

Well, if you don't want to autoboot from RAD: you can install FFS on it.
Makes it a lot faster (format it first, copy the GlobVec, Mount, DosType,
and FileSystem lines from the FAST: entry in the sample MountList with 1.3).

>	3. When I tried to install vd0: under 1.3, I screwed everything up
>	   so badly that a warm reboot would not recover.

Probably you ran FastMemFirst before mounting VD0:.  See above.
-- 
Stephen Walton, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Cal State Univ. Northridge
RCKG01M@CALSTATE.BITNET       ecphssrw@afws.csun.edu
swalton@solar.stanford.edu    ...!csun!afws.csun.edu!bcphssrw