My system hung, so I used C-A-D, and I got the following:
HoTFix: HotFix not allowed during shutdown 08869090
I've never seen a HotFix error message before. What does it mean?
Since then, within the last day, I've had two Trap 3 crashes, which I gather involves some breakpoint used in debugging software, but I'm using kernel 14.103, which I thought wasn't one of the debugging kernels.
And I burned a couple of audio CDs that, when played, behave very oddly. I wonder if my system might have developed a hardware problem, but where?
tho...@antispam.ham wrote: > Has anyone seen this error before?
> My system hung, so I used C-A-D, and I got the following:
> HoTFix: HotFix not allowed during shutdown > 08869090
> I've never seen a HotFix error message before. What does it > mean?
I think I have seen that message before - or something very similar - several years ago. It was delivered by a WindowsMe system that was rapidly dying from spyware/malware infections.
I'd be surprised if the cause is the same but the below problems look like the sort of problems that were occurring on that Windows system - continual crashes, strange results during file copying; not sure if the customer had burnt any CDs which behaved oddly though.
> Since then, within the last day, I've had two Trap 3 crashes, which > I gather involves some breakpoint used in debugging software, but I'm > using kernel 14.103, which I thought wasn't one of the debugging > kernels.
> And I burned a couple of audio CDs that, when played, behave very > oddly. I wonder if my system might have developed a hardware problem, > but where?
While I doubt if your system has a working Windows malware installed and causing problems I have never seen a HotFix message on OS/2 based systems and have no idea what could cause it.
As regards crashes and CD burning problems: It might be worth opening the system case and checking for "dust bunnies". Dust buildup on cooling surfaces and on fans can cause all sorts of weird problems which at first glance look like hardware faults.
Might also be worth checking that the PSU is not failing.
Trevor Hemsley writes: >> Has anyone seen this error before?
>> My system hung, so I used C-A-D, and I got the following:
>> HoTFix: HotFix not allowed during shutdown >> 08869090 > Your hard disk is most likely failing. Hotfix is an HPFS term for allocating a > spare sector to a failed one.
> Backup quick.
That's the first thing I did yesterday after the problem surfaced. Unfortunately, the first attempt at a backup failed due to a Trap 3. The second attempt succeeded, but another Trap 3 occurred shortly thereafter.
If it's just bad sectors, would reformatting with /L possibly help?
I've got six drives on this system, but if it's just HPFS that issues that message, that would narrow down the possibilities, because only one drive is formatted with HPFS (but with three partitions, one for the operating system, one for a maintenance partition, and one spare). Everything else is JFS. On ther other hand, during one of the reboots, JFS did not complete the CHKDSK on one of the JFS partitions because of some problem that referenced a file "M", which I don't have. The problem did not recur during a second reboot. But with various problems occuring with various drives, I'm wondering whether my SCSI adapter might be going bad.
> As regards crashes and CD burning problems: It might be worth opening the > system case and checking for "dust bunnies". Dust buildup on cooling > surfaces and on fans can cause all sorts of weird problems which at first > glance look like hardware faults.
> Might also be worth checking that the PSU is not failing.
Exactly. The PSU is the problem most of the time, much more often that Harddrive, CPU or anything else. I had fatal CHKDSK failures and IBMS506.ADD wildly beeping and installed OS/2 about 3 times until I finally replaced the PSU from its original 150W (much too little) to 400W. I have not had any problems since.
The reason: the PSU is the only part a PC manufacturer can save money (with the problem of a too weak PSU showing up much later due to environmental wear: temperature, aging ...). And that's what they do. So, invest that money and get a new one. It's not that expensive.
Lars Erdmann wrote: > Hi, >> As regards crashes and CD burning problems: It might be worth opening the >> system case and checking for "dust bunnies". Dust buildup on cooling >> surfaces and on fans can cause all sorts of weird problems which at first >> glance look like hardware faults.
>> Might also be worth checking that the PSU is not failing.
> Exactly. The PSU is the problem most of the time, much more often that > Harddrive, CPU or anything else. > I had fatal CHKDSK failures and IBMS506.ADD wildly beeping and installed > OS/2 about 3 times until I finally replaced the PSU from its original 150W > (much too little) to 400W. I have not had any problems since.
> The reason: the PSU is the only part a PC manufacturer can save money (with > the problem of a too weak PSU showing up much later due to environmental > wear: temperature, aging ...). And that's what they do. So, invest that > money and get a new one. It's not that expensive.
> Lars
I second your motion. As well note that in general, as a result of the way PSU design and costing work out, the lower rhe PSU size, compared to the load which is put on it, the shorter the Mean Time Before Failure (MTBF) life for a given unit is. What you can do to seriously extend the MTBF for the whole system is to use a seriously larger PSU for the box. Not unusual to get a somewhat linear result. Double the size is double the MTBF for a given situation, regardless of the load-failure relationship, for the long run.
A 150 watt PSU is a horribly small PSU for virtually anything we do these days. As well anything with more than one drive in it is very much at risk for a PSU that size.
On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 02:01:05 UTC in comp.os.os2.bugs, tho...@antispam.ham wrote: > If it's just bad sectors, would reformatting with /L possibly help?
With modern hard disks, once you get bad sectors being reported back to the operating system it means that the stash of spares that the disk keeps for itself is exhausted and then it's just a matter of time before it gets worse. Disks do remapping in the background without ever telling you that it's happened thus concealing the damage from you until the last minute.
> I've got six drives on this system, but if it's just HPFS that issues > that message, that would narrow down the possibilities, because only > one drive is formatted with HPFS
[H:\os2\dll]strings uhpfs.dll | grep -i hotfix HoTFix: HotFix not allowed during ShutDown
[H:\os2\dll]strings ujfs.dll | grep -i hotfix
[H:\os2\dll]
Looks like just HPFS has this error msg.
-- Trevor Hemsley, Brighton, UK Trevor dot Hemsley at ntlworld dot com
Andi B. writes: > Maybe it's a problem introduced by your ATAPI-SCSI bridge you mentioned in the > other thread. Have you tried if this errors are related to this?
I doubt it. I've been running a pure SCSI system for six years.
Lars Erdmann writes: > Exactly. The PSU is the problem most of the time, much more often that > Harddrive, CPU or anything else. > I had fatal CHKDSK failures and IBMS506.ADD wildly beeping and installed > OS/2 about 3 times until I finally replaced the PSU from its original 150W > (much too little) to 400W. I have not had any problems since.
> The reason: the PSU is the only part a PC manufacturer can save money (with > the problem of a too weak PSU showing up much later due to environmental > wear: temperature, aging ...). And that's what they do. So, invest that > money and get a new one. It's not that expensive.
My SCSI hard drives are in an external enclosure with a separate power supply. When I first constructed my system six years ago, I replaced the internal power supply with a beefier unit so that it wouldn't be working too close to its capacity.
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 01:31:57 UTC, tho...@antispam.ham wrote: > > Exactly. The PSU is the problem most of the time, much more often that > > Harddrive, CPU or anything else. > > I had fatal CHKDSK failures and IBMS506.ADD wildly beeping and installed > > OS/2 about 3 times until I finally replaced the PSU from its original 150W > > (much too little) to 400W. I have not had any problems since.
> > The reason: the PSU is the only part a PC manufacturer can save money (with > > the problem of a too weak PSU showing up much later due to environmental > > wear: temperature, aging ...). And that's what they do. So, invest that > > money and get a new one. It's not that expensive.
> My SCSI hard drives are in an external enclosure with a separate power > supply. When I first constructed my system six years ago, I replaced > the internal power supply with a beefier unit so that it wouldn't be > working too close to its capacity.
6 years is a long time in terms of computer equipment. I've had numerous bad experiences with ageing capacitors. -- "I smell blood and an era of prominent madmen." - W.H. Auden
|
