I can report that 10.2.0.1.0 works. I'm not sure if using 10.x is an
option for me yet, but this is good news. Hopefully we can figure out the
underlying cause on 9.x. If you need me to do any testing please let me
know.
Jim
At 11:39am on 2007 April 02, Jim Ursetto did write:
> Thank you. Specifically, I had the issue with both 9.2.0.6.0 and
> 9.0.1.3.0. These were the only ones I tried; I don't think I have any
> other versions of 9.x laying around anywhere.
>
> I do apparently have 10.2.0.1.0, though. I will try this one.
--
"With each CPU running independently at 4Mhz, it would give us
over SIX TIMES more processor power than a 6309 CoCo3."
-- http://www.axess.com/twilight/sock/cocofile/coco4.html
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / 0x43340710 / 517B C658 D2CB 260D 3E1F 5ED1 6DB3 FBB9 4334
0710
