MikeyD <m_donaghy50@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<414b2911$0$82240$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>...
> > I have found the reason of such a strange behavior of the installer.
> > During installation, I used the "tagpath" mode with tagfiles written
> > on a floppy. Besides Slackware's a, ap, d, ... directories the
> > floppy contained a couple of folders with names different from
> > those of Slackware series. This caused the installer to make
> > a mistake.
> >
> The installer probably thought those were infinite disksets, because it
> relies on the install.end file to tell it where a diskset ends. Remember
> the installer is still really floppy-oriented.

Oh, thanks! I have overlooked the install.end file.

Still, it may be interesting that, say, just a, ap, d, n folders
work fine w/o install.end.

Regards,
Mikhail

Mikhail Zotov wrote:

> MikeyD <m_donaghy50@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<414b2911$0$82240$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>...
>> > I have found the reason of such a strange behavior of the installer.
>> > During installation, I used the "tagpath" mode with tagfiles written
>> > on a floppy. Besides Slackware's a, ap, d, ... directories the
>> > floppy contained a couple of folders with names different from
>> > those of Slackware series. This caused the installer to make
>> > a mistake.
>> >
>> The installer probably thought those were infinite disksets, because it
>> relies on the install.end file to tell it where a diskset ends. Remember
>> the installer is still really floppy-oriented.
>
> Oh, thanks! I have overlooked the install.end file.
>
> Still, it may be interesting that, say, just a, ap, d, n folders
> work fine w/o install.end.
>
Yes, because there's an install.end in those folders on the CD.

On Wednesday 22 September 2004 11:33 am, MikeyD did deign to grace us with
the following:

> Mikhail Zotov wrote:
>
>> MikeyD <m_donaghy50@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:<414b2911$0$82240$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>...
>>> > I have found the reason of such a strange behavior of the installer.
>>> > During installation, I used the "tagpath" mode with tagfiles written
>>> > on a floppy. Besides Slackware's a, ap, d, ... directories the
>>> > floppy contained a couple of folders with names different from
>>> > those of Slackware series. This caused the installer to make
>>> > a mistake.
>>> >
>>> The installer probably thought those were infinite disksets, because it
>>> relies on the install.end file to tell it where a diskset ends. Remember
>>> the installer is still really floppy-oriented.
>>
>> Oh, thanks! I have overlooked the install.end file.
>>
>> Still, it may be interesting that, say, just a, ap, d, n folders
>> work fine w/o install.end.
>>
> Yes, because there's an install.end in those folders on the CD.

Are we all adopting Redmondese as our new language? Those are
"subdirectories," containing "disk sets."

Please get your terminology right.

Thank You. :-)
Rich

MikeyD <m_donaghy50@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<4151c566$0$69721$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>...
> Mikhail Zotov wrote:
>
> > MikeyD <m_donaghy50@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:<414b2911$0$82240$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>...
> >> > I have found the reason of such a strange behavior of the installer.
....
> >> > those of Slackware series. This caused the installer to make
> >> > a mistake.
> >> >
> >> The installer probably thought those were infinite disksets, because it
> >> relies on the install.end file to tell it where a diskset ends. Remember
> >> the installer is still really floppy-oriented.
> >
> > Oh, thanks! I have overlooked the install.end file.
> >
> > Still, it may be interesting that, say, just a, ap, d, n folders
> > work fine w/o install.end.
> >
> Yes, because there's an install.end in those folders on the CD.

Oh, I see (finally :-)) Thanks!

Regards,
Mikhail

Rich Grise <null@example.net> wrote in message news:<4po4d.9401$je.5192@trnddc04>...
> On Wednesday 22 September 2004 11:33 am, MikeyD did deign to grace us with
> the following:
>
> > Mikhail Zotov wrote:
> >
> >> MikeyD <m_donaghy50@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:<414b2911$0$82240$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>...
> >>> > I have found the reason of such a strange behavior of the installer.
> >>> > During installation, I used the "tagpath" mode with tagfiles written
> >>> > on a floppy. Besides Slackware's a, ap, d, ... directories the
> >>> > floppy contained a couple of folders with names different from
> >>> > those of Slackware series. This caused the installer to make
> >>> > a mistake.
> >>> >
....
> >> Still, it may be interesting that, say, just a, ap, d, n folders
> >> work fine w/o install.end.
> >>
> > Yes, because there's an install.end in those folders on the CD.
>
> Are we all adopting Redmondese as our new language? Those are
> "subdirectories," containing "disk sets."
>
> Please get your terminology right.
>
> Thank You. :-)
> Rich

LOL! Thanks for the remark! I'll do my best to `improve' my
(slack) English :-)

Mikhail

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004, Mikhail Zotov wrote:
> Rich Grise <null@example.net> wrote
>> On Wednesday 22 September 2004 11:33 am, MikeyD did deign to grace us with
[...]
>>> Yes, because there's an install.end in those folders on the CD.
>>
>> Are we all adopting Redmondese as our new language? Those are
>> "subdirectories," containing "disk sets."
>> Please get your terminology right.


phht. myself favours the term 'folder' - i find that polysyllabic
terms like 'heirarchical directory structure' and 'subdirectory' are
stumbling blocks for many computerphobes and illiterati. it's not
the concepts which cause problems for them, just the large unfamiliar
words.

t'is much less bothersome to explain 'data into a file, like onto a
sheet of paper), many files into a single folder, and folders holding
other folders just as well as files.' this they can get their minds
around. the analogy continues (only if nescessary), to explain
partitions as filedrawers and disk units as filecabinets.

in ancient times, a large part of computerphobia was the fear of
doing something stupid and breaking the expensive machine. today it
seems that computerphobia rises mostly from the fear of not being able
to talk about it without sounding like a TF idiot. the nescessary
concepts aren't that difficult to comprehend, but the plethora of
unfamiliar terms can be overwhelming.

much better to adapt appropriate familiar words whenever possible.

methinks that 'Redmondism' is definately at fault here, both creating
a problem and offering a (halfassed) solution, deliberately making
things difficult while pretending they are making them easier. i'm
baffled why they didn't call a folder something more confusing, like
'Operative Document Cluster' or such. i think microsoft is absolutely
masterful at co-opting language to divide and conquer. (consider the
names XP and Xbox, IMHO chosen in part to confuse the use of 'Xbox' as
eescribing a machine running an X user interface ...)

Do not underestimate the power that the choice of a vocabulary has
over the ability to comprehend a topic and the direction and content
of any ensuing discussion.







--
Fire the Liars - Impeach Bush and Cheney!
Prosecute the criminals - Indict Rumsfeld and Ashcroft!
Corruption starts at the top.

William Hunt, Portland Oregon USA