IFL 3.07 illegal instruction

User discussion and information resource forum for Image products.

IFL 3.07 illegal instruction

Postby D.V. Ant » Wed May 31, 2017 9:09 pm

I have an old P2-300 with 128MB RAM that I use for my BootIt BM DOS/Win98/Win2k setup. I tried using Image for Linux 3.07 no-network CUI CD-ROM to do a backup of the internal drive to a USB hard disk. It gets about 10MB or so done, and then exits out with "illegal instruction". IFL 2.89 works.

At some point in the development cycle, were the compiler switches changed to a newer architecture and the code no longer supports a processor this old? Or is it the newer Linux kernel that's included in the boot media? What would be the most recent version I could use, and would Image for DOS be affected by this as well? I need to get a PS/2 keyboard as the USB detection hangs USB one right now, so I can't test it.
D.V. Ant
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 9:01 pm

Re: IFL 3.07 illegal instruction

Postby TeraByte Support(PP) » Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:21 pm

According to the manuals, both require a Pentium 4 or higher. You might try IFL 2.99, which still has a v3.x kernel (IFL 3.x+ uses a v4.x kernel).

IFD should still run on it. For the USB keyboard issue you could try hiding the USB controller using the USBIgnoreMask INI file option. Note that if it only has one controller that it would also prevent you from using your USB drive. Does BIBM see the USB drive? If it doesn't, then IFD probably wouldn't either.
Paul Purviance
TeraByte Support
TeraByte Support(PP)
 
Posts: 1108
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:51 pm

Re: IFL 3.07 illegal instruction

Postby D.V. Ant » Thu Jun 01, 2017 8:56 pm

IFL 2.99 seems to work fine. Thanks!

This system only has a single USB controller, which is being shared between the keyboard and external HDD that I'm backing up to. So as soon as IFD has to scan for USB, it does see the drive, but then the KB stops working. IFD was my first choice due to its convenient installation with BIBM.
D.V. Ant
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 9:01 pm

Re: IFL 3.07 illegal instruction

Postby Bob Coleman » Fri Jun 02, 2017 11:11 am

D.V. Ant wrote:
> IFD was my first choice due to its convenient installation with BIBM.

I get torn in two directions here. I sometimes feel the same, but IFL almost always performs the operation in less time, probably even factoring in the increased boot time.
Bob Coleman
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:58 am

Re: IFL 3.07 illegal instruction

Postby mjnelson99 » Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:36 pm

I frequently use IFL instead of IFW.I like the choice.
Mary

On 6/2/2017 1:11 PM, Bob Coleman wrote:
> D.V. Ant wrote:
>> IFD was my first choice due to its convenient installation with BIBM.
>
> I get torn in two directions here. I sometimes feel the same, but IFL almost always performs the operation in less time, probably even factoring in the increased boot time.
>
>
mjnelson99
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:24 pm

Re: IFL 3.07 illegal instruction

Postby DrTeeth » Tue Jun 27, 2017 3:16 am

On Fri, 2 Jun 2017 11:11:03 PDT, just as I was about to take a herb,
Bob Coleman disturbed my reverie and wrote:

>I get torn in two directions here. I sometimes feel the same, but IFL almost always performs the operation in less time, probably even factoring in the increased boot time.

IfL is about 5 times faster than IfD. I wish even a cut-down version
of IfL was available as an option in BIBM.
--
Cheers,

DrT

"If you want to find out what is wrong
with democracy, spend five minutes with
the average voter." - Winston Churchill
DrTeeth
 
Posts: 970
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:58 am


Return to Image for DOS/Linux/Windows

cron