-=> Quoting Murray Lesser to Ray Hyder, [04 Nov 99  17:49:00] <=-

 ML> You might take the time
 ML> some day to check out how many of the new files in your newest FixPak
 ML> replace those same-named files that were updated in a previous FixPak.

What else would one expect, given that each of these FP's includes
everything 'good' that was in each of the earlier FP's? At least IIRC?
Some file replaced by FP1 (and not changed since), will appear in each
subsequent FP. Not so??

 RH>My advice now would be to get to the current version of OS/2.

I second that advice. FP12 serves me as well as it does RH.

 ML> After over six years of running various versions of OS/2, and too
 ML> much experience with ills introduced by FixPaks, I have learned not to
 ML> apply a FixPak (after the first few following the introduction of a
 ML> new version of the operating system) unless it supports new hardware
 ML> that I intend to install, or it adds new function that I want.  I have
 ML> carefully read the README for Warp 4 FixPak 10 (the most recent that I
 ML> have on CD-ROM), but have decided not to try installing it because
 ML> there is nothing in it that I need.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My experience with FP's is only associated with the 12 that apply to
Warp 4. I always waited a few days to see if I heard any screaming in
this forum. If yes, I waited. If no, I updated. I skipped FP10 entirely,
since FP11 was here before the screams subsided. On my system, FP12 is
as solid as RH said it is. As for the under scored, each of these FP's
have addressed Y2K issues. I recommend you go with FP12 =before= the end
of '99. YMMV  {^;

... FidoNet-Mail: 1:382/92 or E-mail: Bat.Lang@92.ima.infomail.com

--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
147/2021