KR> and if it proves to be such then the likelihood of it being caused

 KR> by the re-configuration is 3 parts of 1% of absolutely bugger all (:



 RS> Fraid not. And you cant explain why if your story about it being the

 RS> fault of Pauls system, why no one else saw it. You were the only one

 RS> who had done a complete 'end to end' reconfig, it bit you after that,

 RS> and that surprises you ?  Nuts.



 RS> Every single bit of the sequence you have stated can be explained by

 RS> a single TH1 somehow on your system which caused your Binkley to refuse

 RS> a TH1 from Pauls. And when that occurred AFTER your 'end to end' reconfig,

 RS> its far more likely than anything else that the reconfig caused that.



see my previous message, since the problem actually occurred before the

reconfig, it sort of cuts the legs from under this theory doesn't it?



                        Keith



... Wagner's music is better than it sounds. - Twain



--- PPoint 1.88