Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.misc > #380 > unrolled thread

still getting dydl cache errors

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.misc

Contents

  still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-13 08:04 -0400
    Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-13 08:05 -0500
      Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-14 22:07 -0400
        Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-14 22:09 -0500
          Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-15 09:26 -0400
            Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-15 17:28 -0500
              Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-15 19:32 -0400
                Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-15 20:23 -0400
                  Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-15 20:57 -0500
                  Re: still getting dydl cache errors dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2011-06-16 15:19 +1200
                Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-15 20:57 -0500
                  Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-15 23:31 -0400
                    Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-15 23:50 -0400
                      Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-16 09:08 -0400
                    Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-15 23:15 -0500
                      Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-16 09:19 -0400
                        Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-16 18:53 -0500
                          Re: still getting dydl cache errors Chris Ridd <chrisridd@mac.com> - 2011-06-17 06:21 +0100
                          Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-17 17:44 -0400
                            Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-21 12:59 -0400
                              Re: still getting dydl cache errors Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2011-06-21 19:23 -0500
                    Re: still getting dydl cache errors dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2011-06-16 19:19 +1200
                      Re: still getting dydl cache errors Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> - 2011-06-16 09:13 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#380 — still getting dydl cache errors

About once every day or two my shared cache file gets corrupted and 
programs stop working.  If I open a terminal session I see:

dyld: shared cached file was build against a different libSystem.dylib, 
ignoring cache

This has gotten to be such a nuisance that I created a script to rebuild 
the cache:

# dyld -- rebuild the dyld cache

sudo update_dyld_shared_cache

Which produces the following output:
update_dyld_shared_cache[7941] current i386 cache file invalid because 
/System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DesktopServicesPriv.framework/Versions/
A/DesktopServicesPriv has changed
update_dyld_shared_cache[7941] current ppc cache file invalid because 
/System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DesktopServicesPriv.framework/Versions/
A/DesktopServicesPriv has changed
update_dyld_shared_cache[7941] current x86_64 cache file invalid because 
/System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DesktopServicesPriv.framework/Versions/
A/DesktopServicesPriv has changed

Then it is okay for another day or two.  The man page says you have to 
restart the computer for this to take effect, but it seems to work fine 
without that.

I would still like to know the cause of the problem so I can correct it.  
It appears some program tries to rebuild the cache file but does it 
wrong.  My guess is it is a system program, but I don't know that.  I am 
currently running 10.6.7.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#381

In article <bob-8BFF66.08042713062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> About once every day or two my shared cache file gets corrupted and 
> programs stop working.  If I open a terminal session I see:
> 
> dyld: shared cached file was build against a different libSystem.dylib, 
> ignoring cache
> 
> This has gotten to be such a nuisance that I created a script to rebuild 
> the cache:
> 
> # dyld -- rebuild the dyld cache
> 
> sudo update_dyld_shared_cache
> 
> Which produces the following output:
> update_dyld_shared_cache[7941] current i386 cache file invalid because 
> /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DesktopServicesPriv.framework/Versions/
> A/DesktopServicesPriv has changed
> update_dyld_shared_cache[7941] current ppc cache file invalid because 
> /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DesktopServicesPriv.framework/Versions/
> A/DesktopServicesPriv has changed
> update_dyld_shared_cache[7941] current x86_64 cache file invalid because 
> /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/DesktopServicesPriv.framework/Versions/
> A/DesktopServicesPriv has changed
> 
> Then it is okay for another day or two.  The man page says you have to 
> restart the computer for this to take effect, but it seems to work fine 
> without that.
> 
> I would still like to know the cause of the problem so I can correct it.  
> It appears some program tries to rebuild the cache file but does it 
> wrong.  My guess is it is a system program, but I don't know that.  I am 
> currently running 10.6.7.

I'm still really confused as to why you haven't done a clean install, 
since you know crucial system files like the Mach kernel itself 
mysteriously were deleted from this machine months ago. Seemingly you 
could have done a re-install a couple times over with all of the hours 
you've spent messing around with all of the related issues!

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#386

In article <jollyroger-E4BF17.08052713062011@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> I'm still really confused as to why you haven't done a clean install, 
> since you know crucial system files like the Mach kernel itself 
> mysteriously were deleted from this machine months ago. Seemingly you 
> could have done a re-install a couple times over with all of the hours 
> you've spent messing around with all of the related issues!

Fear!  I'm afraid of possibly screwing up something that is working.  
Plus I have to bring it up-to-date afterwards while preserving my own 
stuff.

I'm not anywhere near as comfortable with this stuff as some people are 
because I don't have the understanding of what is actually going on 
underneath.  I recently did a restore from yesterday's backup, after 
saving my home directory first, and I'm not really sure I did that right.

I used to re-install Unix systems at the drop of a hat, but OS X seems 
to be a lot more complex.  There are directory trees that contain stuff 
I just don't understand.  Some have to be preserved and restored after 
the re-install and some don't.  It seems safer to rebuild the cache.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#387

In article <bob-1A18B2.22075514062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-E4BF17.08052713062011@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > I'm still really confused as to why you haven't done a clean install, 
> > since you know crucial system files like the Mach kernel itself 
> > mysteriously were deleted from this machine months ago. Seemingly you 
> > could have done a re-install a couple times over with all of the hours 
> > you've spent messing around with all of the related issues!
> 
> Fear!  I'm afraid of possibly screwing up something that is working.  
> Plus I have to bring it up-to-date afterwards while preserving my own 
> stuff.
> 
> I'm not anywhere near as comfortable with this stuff as some people are 
> because I don't have the understanding of what is actually going on 
> underneath.  I recently did a restore from yesterday's backup, after 
> saving my home directory first, and I'm not really sure I did that right.
> 
> I used to re-install Unix systems at the drop of a hat, but OS X seems 
> to be a lot more complex.  There are directory trees that contain stuff 
> I just don't understand.  Some have to be preserved and restored after 
> the re-install and some don't.  It seems safer to rebuild the cache.

You have a system that has had various unknown system files removed. 
Re-installation seems the simplest way to return it to a known good 
state.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#388

In article <jollyroger-811BE9.22090814062011@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> You have a system that has had various unknown system files removed. 
> Re-installation seems the simplest way to return it to a known good 
> state.

You are correct about that.  I guess what I need to do is make a backup 
of the current state, re-install and see what happens.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#390

In article <bob-0B6908.09261515062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-811BE9.22090814062011@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > You have a system that has had various unknown system files removed. 
> > Re-installation seems the simplest way to return it to a known good 
> > state.
> 
> You are correct about that.  I guess what I need to do is make a backup 
> of the current state, re-install and see what happens.

That's what I would do.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#391

In article <jollyroger-0AE58C.17283815062011@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > You are correct about that.  I guess what I need to do is make a backup 
> > of the current state, re-install and see what happens.
> 
> That's what I would do.

Well, that seemed to have been relatively painless.  I guess my fears 
were unwarranted.

I backed up the system as it was.
I re-installed 10.6 and backed that up to another partition.
   This does relatively little damage.  I lost my eSATA drivers
   and I don't know what else, but it seems to have been pretty minor.
I ran the combo update to 10.6.7 then used software update to update all 
the Apple programs.  Backed up to a third partition.

So far the only thing that has failed is Boinc Manager.  I had to 
re-install that.  I'm sure there is other stuff, but I haven't 
discovered it yet.

The update software seems to leave the user tree alone as well as /etc, 
which is good.  It does mess with other stuff, but I'm not sure what.  
I'll find out when I try to run it.  I will have to be careful to 
preserve my original backup until I am sure.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#392

In article <bob-9E6B17.19324915062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> The update software seems to leave the user tree alone as well as /etc, 
> which is good.  It does mess with other stuff, but I'm not sure what.  
> I'll find out when I try to run it.  I will have to be careful to 
> preserve my original backup until I am sure.

Rosetta gets trashed.  I wonder what else?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#394

In article <bob-572F68.20233815062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <bob-9E6B17.19324915062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
>  Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:
> 
> > The update software seems to leave the user tree alone as well as /etc, 
> > which is good.  It does mess with other stuff, but I'm not sure what.  
> > I'll find out when I try to run it.  I will have to be careful to 
> > preserve my original backup until I am sure.
> 
> Rosetta gets trashed.  I wonder what else?

That's just a simple install away.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#395

Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <bob-9E6B17.19324915062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
>  Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:
> 
> > The update software seems to leave the user tree alone as well as /etc,
> > which is good.  It does mess with other stuff, but I'm not sure what.
> > I'll find out when I try to run it.  I will have to be careful to 
> > preserve my original backup until I am sure.
> 
> Rosetta gets trashed.  I wonder what else?

Rosetta and QuickTime Player 7 are two components which are not
installed by default in Snow Leopard, but you could have done a custom
install from the DVD with them enabled. Others which occur to me are the
full suite of printer drivers and X11.

All of these can be installed after the fact, either automatically when
needed (Rosetta), via Software Update for selected printer drivers from
Apple, or manually from http://support.apple.com/downloads/, or by doing
an optional component install from the Snow Leopard DVD (followed by
another Software Update to bring them up to date).

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#393

In article <bob-9E6B17.19324915062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-0AE58C.17283815062011@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > > You are correct about that.  I guess what I need to do is make a backup 
> > > of the current state, re-install and see what happens.
> > 
> > That's what I would do.
> 
> Well, that seemed to have been relatively painless.  I guess my fears 
> were unwarranted.
> 
> I backed up the system as it was.
> I re-installed 10.6 and backed that up to another partition.
>    This does relatively little damage.  I lost my eSATA drivers
>    and I don't know what else, but it seems to have been pretty minor.
> I ran the combo update to 10.6.7 then used software update to update all 
> the Apple programs.  Backed up to a third partition.
> 
> So far the only thing that has failed is Boinc Manager.  I had to 
> re-install that.  I'm sure there is other stuff, but I haven't 
> discovered it yet.
> 
> The update software seems to leave the user tree alone as well as /etc, 
> which is good.  It does mess with other stuff, but I'm not sure what.  
> I'll find out when I try to run it.  I will have to be careful to 
> preserve my original backup until I am sure.

That's exactly what I typically do in such a situation. I keep my backup 
around for a month or two at least, to give myself time to run into any 
situations where I'm missing something that's on the backup drive. It's 
relatively pain-free.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#396

In article <jollyroger-97A7C3.20572415062011@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> That's exactly what I typically do in such a situation. I keep my backup 
> around for a month or two at least, to give myself time to run into any 
> situations where I'm missing something that's on the backup drive. It's 
> relatively pain-free.

It turns out all was for naught.  I just opened the terminal and got:

dyld: shared cached file was build against a different libSystem.dylib, 
ignoring cache

On top of that, popper and probably some other things are not working.  
I do not seem to have improved my position.  I am thinking I should 
restore the prior system from my backup unless there is another approach 
I should try.  I couldn't be any worse off.

I could do a clean install but then I could really be in trouble.  This 
is not going well for me.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#397

In article <bob-21F2BF.23315015062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-97A7C3.20572415062011@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > That's exactly what I typically do in such a situation. I keep my backup 
> > around for a month or two at least, to give myself time to run into any 
> > situations where I'm missing something that's on the backup drive. It's 
> > relatively pain-free.
> 
> It turns out all was for naught.  I just opened the terminal and got:
> 
> dyld: shared cached file was build against a different libSystem.dylib, 
> ignoring cache
> 
> On top of that, popper and probably some other things are not working.  
> I do not seem to have improved my position.  I am thinking I should 
> restore the prior system from my backup unless there is another approach 
> I should try.  I couldn't be any worse off.
> 
> I could do a clean install but then I could really be in trouble.  This 
> is not going well for me.

Okay.  I got popper working.  Everything was still there.  I just needed 
to get it going.

OTOH, Boinc is hung.  It has a job to send to Berkeley, but the status 
is:

Communication deferred

Unfortunately, I don't know why.  It just keeps deferring.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#400

It occurred to me that if I re-installed the OS and was still getting 
this error, it has to be from something I am running fairly 
continuously.  The console app hasn't been very helpful, but the only 
thing I can think of is Qpopper.  Therefore, I downloaded, compiled and 
installed the latest version.  Time will tell.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#398

In article <bob-21F2BF.23315015062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-97A7C3.20572415062011@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > That's exactly what I typically do in such a situation. I keep my backup 
> > around for a month or two at least, to give myself time to run into any 
> > situations where I'm missing something that's on the backup drive. It's 
> > relatively pain-free.
> 
> It turns out all was for naught.  I just opened the terminal and got:
> 
> dyld: shared cached file was build against a different libSystem.dylib, 
> ignoring cache
> 
> On top of that, popper and probably some other things are not working.  
> I do not seem to have improved my position.  I am thinking I should 
> restore the prior system from my backup unless there is another approach 
> I should try.  I couldn't be any worse off.
> 
> I could do a clean install but then I could really be in trouble.  This 
> is not going well for me.

For some reason I thought a clean install was what you already did. 

Why would you be in trouble doing a clean install?

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402

In article <jollyroger-24C1B3.23152515062011@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> For some reason I thought a clean install was what you already did. 
> 
> Why would you be in trouble doing a clean install?

As I understand it, a clean install pretty much cleans the disk and 
re-installs what is on the DVD.  Everything I added would be lost and I 
would have to restore it from backup.  The problem is I have been adding 
stuff for years and I am certain I don't know where everything is.

I have a list of Unix based stuff I have to check/install, but most of 
what I use is in apps that aren't all in the applications directory 
tree.  Dumb, but who knew? 

A clean install is an option, but only if I can't solve the problem in a 
less destructive form.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#403

In article <bob-26B78D.09190816062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-24C1B3.23152515062011@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > For some reason I thought a clean install was what you already did. 
> > 
> > Why would you be in trouble doing a clean install?
> 
> As I understand it, a clean install pretty much cleans the disk and 
> re-installs what is on the DVD.  Everything I added would be lost and I 
> would have to restore it from backup.  The problem is I have been adding 
> stuff for years and I am certain I don't know where everything is.
> 
> I have a list of Unix based stuff I have to check/install, but most of 
> what I use is in apps that aren't all in the applications directory 
> tree.  Dumb, but who knew? 
> 
> A clean install is an option, but only if I can't solve the problem in a 
> less destructive form.

That's all well and good. Just note that that's what the backup is for, 
and it's probably not half as bad as you imagine it. I have done it 
occasionally over the past few years myself. With a reliable backup, 
there's not much to fear.

-- 
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#404

On 2011-06-17 00:53:20 +0100, Jolly Roger said:

> In article <bob-26B78D.09190816062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
>  Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:
> 
>> In article <jollyroger-24C1B3.23152515062011@news.individual.net>,
>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> For some reason I thought a clean install was what you already did.
>>> 
>>> Why would you be in trouble doing a clean install?
>> 
>> As I understand it, a clean install pretty much cleans the disk and
>> re-installs what is on the DVD.  Everything I added would be lost and I
>> would have to restore it from backup.  The problem is I have been adding
>> stuff for years and I am certain I don't know where everything is.
>> 
>> I have a list of Unix based stuff I have to check/install, but most of
>> what I use is in apps that aren't all in the applications directory
>> tree.  Dumb, but who knew?
>> 
>> A clean install is an option, but only if I can't solve the problem in a
>> less destructive form.
> 
> That's all well and good. Just note that that's what the backup is for,
> and it's probably not half as bad as you imagine it. I have done it
> occasionally over the past few years myself. With a reliable backup,
> there's not much to fear.

I'd also suggest that you want to rethink how you are managing your 
"list of Unix based stuff". If you're doing it all manually - try Fink 
(is it still going?) or MacPorts (it is). It makes it *much* easier to 
rebuild.
-- 
Chris

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#405

In article <jollyroger-AD03AF.18531916062011@news.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> That's all well and good. Just note that that's what the backup is for, 
> and it's probably not half as bad as you imagine it. I have done it 
> occasionally over the past few years myself. With a reliable backup, 
> there's not much to fear.

I haven't had a problem since I re-installed Qpopper.  That's only a 
couple of days but this had been cropping up with some frequency.

One thing, this whole experience has helped me to clean up my notes.  I 
wondered why I wasn't getting local mail from root when the alias file 
was correct.  I forgot to run newaliases.  The install replaced he 
database!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#413

In article <bob-ADF936.17442817062011@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com>,
 Robert Peirce <bob@peirce-family.com> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-AD03AF.18531916062011@news.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> > That's all well and good. Just note that that's what the backup is for, 
> > and it's probably not half as bad as you imagine it. I have done it 
> > occasionally over the past few years myself. With a reliable backup, 
> > there's not much to fear.
> 
> I haven't had a problem since I re-installed Qpopper.  That's only a 
> couple of days but this had been cropping up with some frequency.
> 
> One thing, this whole experience has helped me to clean up my notes.  I 
> wondered why I wasn't getting local mail from root when the alias file 
> was correct.  I forgot to run newaliases.  The install replaced he 
> database!

Here I am a few more days in and still no problem!  I have to conclude 
the problem was coming from Qpopper and may have begun around the time I 
upgraded to 10.6.7.  It is possible something in the upgrade tickled a 
dependency in qpopper.  Anyhow, downloading the latest version seems to 
have held he problem at bay.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.misc

csiph-web