|
Try here[^]. It's quite handy. I hope it helps...
"Ask not for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee..."
|
|
|
|
|
Just a question, did you reboot after stopping the WWW service?
Also, unless you are writing a web server (or another web related utility) I would not use port 80.
Paul Watson wrote:
"At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote:
"Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
If the physicists find a universal theory describing the laws of universe, I'm sure the a**hole constant will be an integral part of that theory.
|
|
|
|
|
Who know , you can show me the web site please.
I need it very much.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been fighting with a small network for a few weeks. It has 4 Win98 hosts and one WinMe in a peer-to-peer arrangement, with multiple shared folders distributed around the network. I've had to replace one NIC, not because it failed, but because it was consistently connecting at a low rate rather than the high rate it used to, and since it was frequently 'falling off' the net it seemed that the NIC was the most likely culprit. That seemed to clear up a problem with that particular host, but shortly after that was done, another host suddenly lost contact with the rest of the network. I've checked and rechecked everything and can't find anything wrong - all hosts have TCP/IP configured correctly and selected as the default protocol, and all have NetBEUI installed by default. If for some reason TCP/IP acts up, the NetBEUI should pick up the slack, albeit badly. NetBIOS on TCP/IP is enabled on all, too.
I've explained to the users that the order of startup is important - a host can't automatically connect to a share that isn't present on the network, so the serving hosts have to start up first. These machines are losing a connected share while in use! I can't find any reason for this behavior. Any ideas?
"Ask not for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee..."
|
|
|
|
|
In a similar case like that I found it was a faulty cable that was the culprit. And the fauly cable wasn't even near the host experiencing problems. (The cable was marked with different resistance than the rest!)
jhaga
CodeProject House, Paul Watson wrote:
...and the roar of John Simmons own personal Nascar in the garage. Meg flitting about taking photos.Chris having an heated arguement with Colin Davies and .S.Rod. over egian values. Nish manically typing *censur*. Duncan racing around after his pet *c.* Michael Martin and Bryce loudly yelling *c.* C.G. having a fit as Roger Wright loads up *c.* . Anna waving her *c.* and Deb scoffing chocolates in the corner.
...Good heavens!
|
|
|
|
|
jhaga wrote:
it was a faulty cable
That must have been really annoying! Something like 80% of network problems are caused by interconnect faults, so the cables and connectors were the first things I checked - all good. I'm thinking that there's something goofy in the Browser service, but I don't know what will fix it if that's the case; maybe setting one of the PCs to Master will help.
"Ask not for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee..."
|
|
|
|
|
Did you solve this problem? Just in case I ever see something similar.
jhaga
CodeProject House, Paul Watson wrote:
...and the roar of John Simmons own personal Nascar in the garage. Meg flitting about taking photos.Chris having an heated arguement with Colin Davies and .S.Rod. over egian values. Nish manically typing *censur*. Duncan racing around after his pet *c.* Michael Martin and Bryce loudly yelling *c.* C.G. having a fit as Roger Wright loads up *c.* . Anna waving her *c.* and Deb scoffing chocolates in the corner.
...Good heavens!
|
|
|
|
|
I thought so, as it was running great for a while. I swapped the switch they were using with one I had at home and the problem went away. I really wish I had some decent tools for isolating this stuff - I feel like an idiot telling them that there's no way to isolate it to one component. Sadly, I just found out that it failed again last weekend. Once again, the shares had to be remapped on each of the client machines, and I can't figure out how the heck they fall off in the first place! I hate to set one to be the master browse controller, as I never know when they'll turn a machine off. Maybe a master LMHOSTS file will help, copied on each machine.
"Ask not for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee..."
|
|
|
|
|
A network sniffer that captures every packet on the network could be one possibility. I am at the moment working on a program that would store the last 2 GB into a file and report everything that is out of the normal. But this is only a work in progress like always...
jhaga
CodeProject House, Paul Watson wrote:
...and the roar of John Simmons own personal Nascar in the garage. Meg flitting about taking photos.Chris having an heated arguement with Colin Davies and .S.Rod. over egian values. Nish manically typing *censur*. Duncan racing around after his pet *c.* Michael Martin and Bryce loudly yelling *c.* C.G. having a fit as Roger Wright loads up *c.* . Anna waving her *c.* and Deb scoffing chocolates in the corner.
...Good heavens!
|
|
|
|
|
That would be a big help, especially if it highlights abnormal packets rather than the user having to wade through pages of log files. Need I say, "Hurry!"?
"Ask not for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee..."
|
|
|
|
|
How do you access admin shares on XP Pro? Like \\PC_2\C$\ When you do this in Windows 2000 it will ask you for username and password and you can enter something like PC_2\Administrator password but on XP this doesn't work even with file sharing enabled.
|
|
|
|
|
It works fine for me... What happens when you type \\PC_2 in and press enter??? Does it ask you for the username and password then???
Regards,
Brian Dela 
|
|
|
|
|
Hello All,
Is the Windows NT/2000 GINA system the same one used by Windows XP ? If I already have a custom GINA DLL that is usable in Win NT/2K, can I use this GINA in Win XP ?
Thanks all,
Bio.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I hope anyone can help me on this issue. I have a 16-bit application running on Windows NT server 4.0 . This application wil log the network traffic with the current time and date. However, the time that this application logged, is always 7 minutes ahead of the Windows NT Server time. And the applicaiton only update the time it logged every 7-minutes interval.
I ran this application on Windows NT Sever 4.0 before, and never had this problem. Don't know what cause it this time.
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a way to speed up the copying of files from NT 4.0 server to a W2K workstation? I've tried the reg hack on MS website but I'm not sure if I have to have the latest SP installed also. Because after installing the reg hack it still is slow.
Thanks
Tom Wright
tawright915@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
I have two physical drives in my Windows 2000 machine. The first one is a "basic NTFS" drive, and the second is a "dynamic NTFS" drive mapped to a particular folder on the first. This arrangement works fine until I want to delete a folder from the second drive. Removing a folder from a command prompt works as expected. If, however, I try to do the same thing from Windows Explorer, I always get a "Cannot delete <folder name="">: Access is denied. The source file may be in use." error message. I've tried everything I can think of related to permissions and security settings. I am the administrator of this machine so I wouldn't think it would be a permissions things, but stranger things have happened. Any ideas?
Thanks,
David
|
|
|
|
|
It's me, I'm back again with more hardware problems, though these ones aren't quite as ancient as my previous ones.
Building a computer for my wife with some old bits and pieces I got for free. I will start by listing the hardware, then my problems.
- Case with ATX power supply. PC Partners MB, AMD K6-2/450 CPU, 128MB PC-133 RAM, 10GB HDD, nVIDIA TNT2 M64 32MB video card, CD-ROM.
- Tekram S3AP-A MB with Celeron 366 CPU.
- MS-6199VA MB with Pentium III CPU.
1. Was working with a copuple of problems. Secondary IDE port worked fine while installing Windows but had errors once Windows was installed. No other software or updates applied. Couldn't get video drivers to install and work properly. Could be the video card but it was known to work in the system it came out of. So I decided to try the other MB's.
2. This board was an unknown entity so I thought I would give it a go first. Connected everything up the way it said in the manual. Power it up and the CD-ROM, FDD and HDD all get power but no POST. CPU and power supply fans work. So I assume it is crap and take it out.
3. This board was known working. Put it in and plugged all the cables in as required. Turn on and there is a brief flash of lights on the front panel and that is all. The flash only works first time you press the power button after plugging in the power cable to the power supply. CPU and power supply fans don't work. I thought I may have stuffed the power supply taking it out to get the MB in. But I plugged in the PC Partners board and everything fired up correctly.
I want 3 to be the one up and working obviously as it is the most powerful. I have no idea why the power supply doesn't even turn the fan. Any ideas as what I could try. I have a multimeter if that is required but in the 5 years or so I have owned it I have never used it. So I would need baby instructions.
I assume you are out drinking and playing darts tonight (it's Sunday afternoon here) but I will stay connected looking for your answer anyway.
PS. This is starting to piss me off. I got my hands on an old Pentium 233MMX I wanted to clean up and give to my cousin who is running his business off an even older piece of crap. This one at least took SD-RAM and I think even had USB. I fired it up before taking it home and it and it started up Windows. The CD looked shot and I couldn't get into Windows as it was 2000, I didn't have the password and the license wasn't passed on.
I took the machine apart here at home, cleaned out the 4 ton of dirt, fluff and other crap all over the insides. I took note of the front panel cable connections so I could put it back together. I didn't actually unscrew the MB as it was on a removable backing plate. After carefully cleaning it and putting it back together it doesn't reach POST. Just like in 2 above. Power gets to everything, but no ticking over of the RAM. It is AT power supply not ATX so the power button is on the power supply itself and not connected through the MB.
I'm just about ready to give up on hardware.
Michael Martin
Australia
mjm68@tpg.com.au
"I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end."
- Chris Maunder 15/07/2002
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Martin wrote:
Power it up and the CD-ROM, FDD and HDD all get power but no POST.
Are you sure you put the RAM in? If you get no POST, the most likely possibilities are (1) you didn't put the RAM in or (2) you didn't plug the speaker into the Mobo. The only other possibility I can think of is if the Mobo were to be "fried" (which it might be).
Wish I were there. I have experience with putting together PC's, both old and new (although most of the old PC's I worked on are now "laid to rest").
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." - Jesus
"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
jdunlap wrote:
Are you sure you put the RAM in? If you get no POST, the most likely possibilities are (1) you didn't put the RAM in or (2) you didn't plug the speaker into the Mobo. The only other possibility I can think of is if the Mobo were to be "fried" (which it might be).
Yes. Known good RAM and the speaker is plugged in. MB probably is fried.
jdunlap wrote:
Wish I were there. I have experience with putting together PC's, both old and new (although most of the old PC's I worked on are now "laid to rest").
Wish you or someone else was here too.  I have pulled apart and fixed many PC's as well as building numerous from scratch. Unfortunately this one has me stuffed. 
Michael Martin
Australia
mjm68@tpg.com.au
"I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end."
- Chris Maunder 15/07/2002
|
|
|
|
|
Where'd you get the hardware? You don't have to answer if you don't want to. 
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." - Jesus
"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
jdunlap wrote:
Where'd you get the hardware? You don't have to answer if you don't want to.
The 233MMX mentioned in the PS came from my wife's cousin's step-brother. All the other stuff came from one of the participants in my Work For the Dole project. He does a lot of upgrades on the side that the unemployment office doesn't know about. He didn't need or want the stuff and said 'Here you go'.
I see him again Wednesday but am some what impatient and thought 'I must be doing something obvious and stupid'. I was just hoping someone could point out what.
Michael Martin
Australia
mjm68@tpg.com.au
"I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end."
- Chris Maunder 15/07/2002
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Martin wrote:
the speaker is plugged in
That particular problem will never prevent a PC from booting.
"Please don't put cigarette butts in the urinal. It makes them soggy and hard to light" - Sign in a Bullhead City, AZ Restroom
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Wright wrote:
That particular problem will never prevent a PC from booting
But if, say, the video card isn't working, and the speaker isn't plugged in, you can't hear the POST beeps.
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." - Jesus
"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind." - Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
 Oddly enough, no darts tonite. Just sitting home watching 2010 - all the way thru this time. Awesome movie!
Which version of Windows are you trying to install? The AMD board was current when Win95 was the latest and greatest. And I'm very surprised that you managed to make it work at all with PC-133 RAM - EDO was the standard back then. MBs back then still used INT 13 for disk control, too, and that may be related to the IDE problem. The Celeron board is a loser... don't waste your time on it. No-name boards with second-class processors are always a pain, and not worth the trouble.
The P-III board, as you mention, is the winner in the group. What is the power rating of the supply? The older supplies were sometimes as low as 175W, and that's far too little to run a P-III. Use your multimeter to monitor the supply voltages when you power up. If you see any significant sag (> 5%) try a bigger supply. AT supplies are hard to come by, though, and you might be better off just buying a new case.
RAM incompatibility is something that concerns me on each of these boards - they're all too old to use PC-133 RAM! Another is that they all are old enough that the onboard battery for maintaining the CMOS settings is likely dead. You're not going to get a clean boot if the battery is flat. Your best bet, I think, is to keep the case and cards, but buy a newer MB. They're quite cheap these days...
I've got to get some sack time - it's 1:00 AM here - but I'll think on your dilemma and review it tomorrow... I'm tired, having spent the afternoon responding to a call for help from one of the computer shops in town. They spent 16 hours trying to solve a networking problem on WinXP, then called me. An hour of listening to their tech explain what he'd tried, ten minutes of looking over the settings on the network, and two clicketies later it was working perfectly, and I split the fee for their two days' work. Some days life is good...
"Please don't put cigarette butts in the urinal. It makes them soggy and hard to light" - Sign in a Bullhead City, AZ Restroom
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Wright wrote:
Oddly enough, no darts tonite. Just sitting home watching 2010 - all the way thru this time. Awesome movie!
Good for you.
Roger Wright wrote:
Which version of Windows are you trying to install? The AMD board was current when Win95 was the latest and greatest. And I'm very surprised that you managed to make it work at all with PC-133 RAM - EDO was the standard back then. MBs back then still used INT 13 for disk control, too, and that may be related to the IDE problem. The Celeron board is a loser... don't waste your time on it. No-name boards with second-class processors are always a pain, and not worth the trouble.
Windows 98SE, they both have 168 pin slots, consider them ignored.
Roger Wright wrote:
The P-III board, as you mention, is the winner in the group. What is the power rating of the supply? The older supplies were sometimes as low as 175W, and that's far too little to run a P-III. Use your multimeter to monitor the supply voltages when you power up. If you see any significant sag (> 5%) try a bigger supply. AT supplies are hard to come by, though, and you might be better off just buying a new case.
250W, how do I monitor the supply voltages? Not kidding when I said I was a novice with the tools but had never used it. It's an ATX power supply, if it was AT I have heaps lying around at work. After paying the bills and essentials each fortnight I have $50.00 left over. I haven't made one payment for my sons school fees yet this year either. I cannot afford a new case even though I can get one for about $50.00. Unforseen sh*t eats this and more up each pay. Only the extra work I get sees us through. Not much of that lately though.
Roger Wright wrote:
RAM incompatibility is something that concerns me on each of these boards - they're all too old to use PC-133 RAM! Another is that they all are old enough that the onboard battery for maintaining the CMOS settings is likely dead. You're not going to get a clean boot if the battery is flat. Your best bet, I think, is to keep the case and cards, but buy a newer MB. They're quite cheap these days...
The MS-6199VA supports 133MHz FSB and associated CPU's, shouldn't be a problem. See last paragraph s to why new MB is out of the question also.
Roger Wright wrote:
I've got to get some sack time - it's 1:00 AM here - but I'll think on your dilemma and review it tomorrow... I'm tired, having spent the afternoon responding to a call for help from one of the computer shops in town. They spent 16 hours trying to solve a networking problem on WinXP, then called me. An hour of listening to their tech explain what he'd tried, ten minutes of looking over the settings on the network, and two clicketies later it was working perfectly, and I split the fee for their two days' work. Some days life is good...
Glad to hear something work out in your favour. I will take the machine into work tomorrow (Sunday afternoon your time) and monitor the thread for advice and to post questions back. Thanks.
Michael Martin
Australia
mjm68@tpg.com.au
"I personally love it because I can get as down and dirty as I want on the backend, while also being able to dabble with fun scripting and presentation games on the front end."
- Chris Maunder 15/07/2002
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
