OS/2 Error Code List
William Heiser
One of the things I've always hated about IBM is the way they
report things like "sys01475" with absolutely no clue what that
really means. Even a short string like "invalid boot block" or
something would be useful.
For example, this morning my machine wouldn't boot - at the point where
the boot manager usually takes over, the machine simply said:
OS/2 !! Sys01475
OS/2 !! Sys02027
How useful! (NOT!)
I was about to start a re-install, and in the process discovered that
a non-bootable floppy was in drive A:. Why didn't OS/2 boot manager
just SAY that???
In any case, a list of errors and at least a terse explanation of their
meaning would be very useful.
Thanks,
Bill
Kenneth A. Kahn
>Is there available a list of the error codes for OS/2?
>One of the things I've always hated about IBM is the way they
>report things like "sys01475" with absolutely no clue what that
>really means. Even a short string like "invalid boot block" or
>something would be useful.
>
>For example, this morning my machine wouldn't boot - at the point where
>the boot manager usually takes over, the machine simply said:
>
>OS/2 !! Sys01475
>OS/2 !! Sys02027
>
>How useful! (NOT!)
>
>I was about to start a re-install, and in the process discovered that
>a non-bootable floppy was in drive A:. Why didn't OS/2 boot manager
>just SAY that???
was decided for OS/2 V2 to change the text to message numbers to allow for
NLS considerations. The idea was to document the specific text for each NLS
version of OS/2 V2. Unfortunately, that documentation is hard to find (if it
exists at all). There's a lot of discussion on this internally, including
what to do instead. Below is the description of each message:
SYS1475: The file OS2BOOT cannot be found.
SYS2025: A disk read error occurred.
SYS2027: Insert a system diskette and restart the system.
As for other system messages, there's no one source for them. The best you
can try is to type HELP #### where ### is the error number at an OS/2 command
prompt. The ones listed above won't be there, but most others will.
William Heiser
>NLS considerations. The idea was to document the specific text for each NLS
>version of OS/2 V2. Unfortunately, that documentation is hard to find (if it
>exists at all). There's a lot of discussion on this internally, including
>what to do instead. Below is the description of each message:
Thanks for the description of those specific messages.
I still think it is *really* important to at least publish a list of all
SYSnnnn messages if there will be no text accompanying them. While your
suggestion of using "help ####" while online is acceptable, it doesn't
help in cases such as the one I encountered :-)
Timothy F. Sipples
>Is there available a list of the error codes for OS/2?
>One of the things I've always hated about IBM is the way they
>report things like "sys01475" with absolutely no clue what that
>really means. Even a short string like "invalid boot block" or
>something would be useful.
>For example, this morning my machine wouldn't boot - at the point where
>the boot manager usually takes over, the machine simply said:
>OS/2 !! Sys01475
>OS/2 !! Sys02027
>How useful! (NOT!)
Agreed. This is one of the few areas where there should be a plain
text message. The trouble is that not everyone speaks English, hence
if someone from Japan handed you a diskette it would say:
OS/2 !! Sys01475: $#)adskjpt$%0 ASDljf% Adflj#550823
or some such unintelligible string. So they stick with the numbers,
since none of the national language support is active in such a
situation. (Ever try and fit that sort of thing in a boot sector on a
floppy? :-))
Normally, when OS/2 proper is running, you'll get a nice, friendly
message, such as:
SYS0033: The process cannot access the file because
another process has locked a portion of the file.
Or, if you're in Japan, you'll get the appropriate translation. If
you type:
HELP SYS0033
you'll get a more detailed explanation.
Why the error numbers? Well, if you ever do any programming or error
logging, and you want to interpret the results, these numbers can be
enormously useful. SYS0033 indicates not only the error number, but
where it came from (base operating system, in this case). There are
REX error numbers (for REXX errors), for example.
I could say something gratuitous about how Americans don't realize
there's a world beyond their borders, and how I'm often guilty of it
as much as anyone else, but notice I didn't do that. Sort of. :-)
>I was about to start a re-install, and in the process discovered that
>a non-bootable floppy was in drive A:. Why didn't OS/2 boot manager
>just SAY that???
Boot Manager wasn't in charge at that point -- your machine (and the
floppy) was. It hadn't reached the hard disk yet.
DOS uses a message which says something like:
Non system disk - Insert another
But, again, if you're in Japan you'd scratch your head. (That seems
to be a genuine problem, actually. People exchanging diskettes run
into a bit of confusion once in a while.)
>In any case, a list of errors and at least a terse explanation of their
>meaning would be very useful.
Right. What they should at least have done is put a nice, big insert
in the OS/2 package with an indication of what those error numbers
are.
And here's another possibility: they've got just enough room for a
couple short strings. Why not pick the five top world languages, say,
and use those? Perhaps we'll insult the Croatians and the Lithuanians
in the process, but it might be an improvement.
--
Timothy F. Sipples | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0h, available from
si...@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/info
Dept. of Econ., Univ. | /faq, or from LIST...@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP")
of Chicago, 60637 | [Read the List, THEN post to ONE OS/2 newsgroup.]
William Heiser
>And here's another possibility: they've got just enough room for a
>couple short strings. Why not pick the five top world languages, say,
>and use those? Perhaps we'll insult the Croatians and the Lithuanians
>in the process, but it might be an improvement.
Well, I assume you're being facitious :-)
I (apparently incorrectly) assumed that ENGLISH was basically a standard
at least at the *OS* level. I figured it was similar to the standard
established for Air Traffic Control, where it is nearly universally
agreed (so I'm told) that English is the official language.
BTW, the Croatian girl in my AI class this past semester spoke
very good English :-) :-)
Mike Dickson
WH..SYSnnnn messages if there will be no text accompanying them. While your
WH..suggestion of using "help ####" while online is acceptable, it doesn't
WH..help in cases such as the one I encountered :-)
I couldn't agree any more. Releasing an operating system without any real
paper documentation is absolutely crazy. If you have a problem like the
one you describe then you are stuck. Having the required information on
INF files isn't going to be much use.
/\/\ | |< |. mike.d...@almac.co.uk
---
. SLMR 2.1a . Was That Your Wife I Saw In That GIF?
Timothy F. Sipples
>>And here's another possibility: they've got just enough room for a
>>couple short strings. Why not pick the five top world languages, say,
>>and use those? Perhaps we'll insult the Croatians and the Lithuanians
>>in the process, but it might be an improvement.
>Well, I assume you're being facitious :-)
Only partly. Up until the last sentence I was serious.
>I (apparently incorrectly) assumed that ENGLISH was basically a standard
>at least at the *OS* level. I figured it was similar to the standard
>established for Air Traffic Control, where it is nearly universally
>agreed (so I'm told) that English is the official language.
Far from it. You'd be a fish out of water operating many computers in
the Far East.
In most programming, however, the lingua franca seems to be English.
>BTW, the Croatian girl in my AI class this past semester spoke
>very good English :-) :-)
I'm afraid we can't ask the same of every non-English reading OS/2
user.
SCATTOLIN patrice
>WH..I still think it is *really* important to at least publish a list of all
>WH..SYSnnnn messages if there will be no text accompanying them.
>
>paper documentation is absolutely crazy.
Not all messages prevent the machine from working. Only those that
prevent the machine from operating would need to be provided in printed
form. Look at the thickness of the error manual for VMS. That alone
is justification for not providing it all in printed form.
But it should be available online as part of the documentations because
you can't do a thing with those messages otherwise!
There is a printed list with AIX that is pretty usefull. I
am sure they can do one here as well. The hypertext nature of the .inf would
be a natural for all those messages throwing you back and forth around various
procedures.
Back in 88 when I worked with AIX it didn't have a 'man'. That was
laughable an nobody could beleive it. The reason circulated around
was even worst. Things look like they are improving. Keep it up.
--
Patrice Scattolin
pat...@cs.concordia.ca
Concordia University Montreal, Canada
"I am so far north that Santa lives two blocks from me"
Ron Szeto
Proceed with disk 1. When ask to start install, ESC out to command prompt.
Entering "HELP SYSxxx", where xxx is the error code, will give you the detail
explanation. --Ron
Antony Suter
Try it from any OS/2 command prompt and be pleasantly suprised.
--
Antony Suter [0] ant...@werple.apana.org.au
Melbourne, Australia [1] s87...@rmit.edu.au
"Call me Jack - stranger things have happened!"
major...@gmail.com
Pete
help with? - post the error code(s).
You may also want to ask on the os2world.com forum.
Regards
Pete