🚀 go-pugleaf

: Anyone who has problems with AFS of v2.2 (before had a few bugs) has most
: probably set something wrong - or even not changed the settings that FFS uses!
: Unlike FFS, AFS does mind if the Max Transfer or DMA mask is set wrong - which
: is because it pushes the Harddrive performance pretty hard.

Why does everyone always say this? Why can't people consider the fact
that if someone has had a problem with AFS it may not be their fault?
Why don't they consider the fact that maybe when the fault, which has
occurred on a range of machines, was reported to FLD they
ignored/dismissed it? Why can't they consider that in some cases it
may be user error, but when people have been in touch with FLD (not an
easy job), checked all the settings etc it still happens?

NOTE: The above is not aimed at anyone in particular, but at anyone
who's aimed a 'you've got a pirate copy', 'you're an idiot, you can't
set it up right' or similar comment at anyone who's ever said they've
had trouble with AFS

It can go wrong, anything can, saying it doesn't for you does not
change that.

When (if) it does happen to you, I hope people are much more
sympathetic to you than you were to them.

Paul

--
"I think such creatures are an attempt by the universe to make sure that
 we never take ourselves too seriously."
        -- Delenn (re: cats), "A Race Through Dark Places"