home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!usc!wupost!psuvax1!rutgers!njitgw.njit.edu!hertz.njit.edu!dic5340
- From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
- Subject: Re: Better File Management??
- Message-ID: <1993Jan5.203111.28314@njitgw.njit.edu>
- Date: 5 Jan 93 20:31:11 GMT
- References: <1992Dec31.185639.29060@ultb.isc.rit.edu> <1993Jan1.232730.24131@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Sender: news@njit.edu
- Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
- Lines: 20
- Nntp-Posting-Host: hertz.njit.edu
-
- In article <1993Jan1.232730.24131@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
- >In article <1992Dec31.185639.29060@ultb.isc.rit.edu> jks4675@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
- >>Another suggestion....
- >>Please make the 2.1 upgrade complete...this way I wouldn't need to load
- >>OS/2 2.0, then the CSD, then the 2.1 upgrade, then everything else.
- >
- >Done. That's the plan. (CSDs will always exist, however -- some
- >people insist on having the latest code.)
-
- And you won't have to apply the XR-6055 patch, followed by the 2.1 CSD
- anyway. CSD packages are usually cumulative, so you need only install
- the most recent one.
-
- Of course, 2.1 being an actual revision and not corrective service,
- they may simply issue new 2.1 packages instead of CSD's.
- --
- |) David Charlap | .signature confiscated by FBI due to
- /|_ dic5340@hertz.njit.edu | an ongoing investigation into the
- ((|,) | source of these .signature virusses
- ~|~
-