From: Bill Morrow (penzance_at_gate.net)
Date: Tue Nov 19 2002 - 00:28:15 EST
i think not..
the 701 had the bios creation within the bios..
560X does not, i believe..
so the file system will be more or less transparent while in the 701 days
fat32 was only a coming thing..
<------------------------------->
Cordially, :-)
Bill Morrow
WEB page http://thinkpads.com
thinkpads.com Open Forum
http://www.afaonline.com:8080/webboard/$webb.exe/~2/login?
or go to thinkpads.com and link from there
E-Mail: bill at thinkpads dot com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew" <andrewaa_at_earthlink.net>
To: <thinkpad_at_stderr.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 12:41 AM
Subject: [Thinkpad] Re: do I need FAT16 for hibernation on 560X?
> >On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 14:00:26 -0700, ron wrote:
> >>Some "deferent" not new, but new to me. There is something I need to do
> >>to get my 701 to set aside space for the hibernate file. I put in a new
> >>HDD and get a message that there is no place to put the file. What am I
> >>doing wrong?
> >
> >The computer wants to see a FAT16 partition.
>
>
> Would this also be true for my 560x?
> I think it originally shipped with WIN95 so perhaps it can hibernate in
> a FAT32 partition. I'd hate to find out otherwise under the wrong
> conditions...
>
> >FWIW, I have that on my machine, and also use it for a
> >"service partition",
> >storing I386 and Win98 files, as well as the Hibernate file.
> >
> >Paul
> Always a good idea to keep those files handy. My 560 is about due for
> re-grooving...
>
> --
> Andrew King
> Ann Arbor Michigan
> technology is the answer, what was the question?
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:59:38 EST