Stacks Overflow

Ibm ps 2 / Model 30
July 4, 2010 at 17:43:38
Specs: DOS 3.3, 286
I was able to find a very nice PS 2 model 30 which was well taken care. It only had one bad sector I have upgraded it with a memory board, sound card and modem, all of which are 8-bit. Today I was using it and walked away with a screen saver in place. When I returned a couple of hours later, I received the error message: STACKS OVERFLOW SYSTEM HALTED -110. I have left the system on before for days without problems. I can still access the drive with a boot disk but it will not boot correctly. I have inserted the following command in the config.sys files:
STACKS=9,256, but no luck. Prior to this it had no stacks command in config.sys and ran perfectly. I can't understand what happenned. I don't want to remove the cards I've put in it if something less drastic will do. I don't know that they are the cause. I am running DOS 3.3 on this PS 2 which has a 20 meg hard drive that is only about half full. I would appreciate any help. Thanks in advance. I should say that I do not have windows on this machine.


See More: Stacks Overflow

Report •

July 4, 2010 at 21:54:56
I haven't messed with Dos 3.3 since about 1991.

I haven't messed with a PS/2 model 30 since about 1999.
Up until about 2001 there was lots of T-shooting info and other info for PS/2's on the Canadian IBM site, but I doubt there's any, anywhere, anymore.

Why are you using such an old Dos version?
Dos 3.3 has lots of limitations higher Dos versions do not have, e.g. a max 32mb hard drive size limit.

You can get Dos 6 if not Dos 6.2 on the web free.

"I do not have windows on this machine."

I believe you must have at least Dos 5 for Win 3.1.
The minimum may be lower for Windows 3.0 but not many people used it / use it now.


I have no idea what the 110 is about - that may be a PS/2 only hardware error.

A search on the web using: STACK OVERFLOW SYSTEM HALTED
(not STACKS)

finds various causes and info.

One is installing a hard drive that is too large, but that's not your problem.

If you didn't need to use a stacks line before, you probably don't need to use one now, unless you changed your situation since you last booted and the system worked fine.

Some info about the stacks line here:
Why Does Setup add STACKS=9,256 to the CONFIG.SYS File?

"Today I was using it and walked away with a screen saver in place."

When did you install a screen saver ?
A screen saver that just blanks (blackens) the screen is probably okay, but some old graphical screen savers are very buggy, and I don't recall any being available when I was using Dos 3.3.
If you had just installed it, if there are lines for it in Autoxec.bat or Config.sys, boot with what works and Edit whichever to disable those lines - put rem (space) in front of each one, without pressing Enter within the line. .

Try booting.

If that doesn't help, Edit those to disable other lines, try booting.

Had you just installed hardware, e.g. a card ?
If so, try removing it.

If not, make sure all cards all all the way down in their slots and their bracket is fastened to the case.

Make sure your ram is properly seated.

Other than that, I haven't got a clue what your problem is.

This site has no Dos forum but it does have a Win 3.1 forum and you can get Dos help there. However, you're not likely to get many answers.

Search of that forum for: STACK OVERFLOW


Report •

July 5, 2010 at 06:12:52
There is a DOS forum where it is now.

There are still a lot of Disk Operation System aficionados around.


Report •

July 5, 2010 at 06:40:59
Why zm I using DOS 3.3? I like messing with computers I guess. Don't get me wrong, I have Windows through Vista and even a couple of Macs. What can I say. I will attempt to reseat the boards. The screen savers and everything else was working fine for about a month or so. It was not speceial, just your standard screen saver. I have rebouted several times without success, while at the same time changing my config.sys file. I wonder if some kind of power surge came through, although the system is on a surge suppressor. I tried to post this inquiry in the DOS forum, but I got a message saying I couldn't post in more than one forum. Is there a way to get it answered there? Can I move it?


Report •

Related Solutions

July 5, 2010 at 07:04:21
Stuart S

"There is a DOS forum where it is now."

I'm quite sure this Topic was in the Hardware forum yesterday when I answered it, but it's in the Dos forum now, that I failed to find yesterday.
I don't normally even look for whether there is a Dos forum, and I rarely look at the Windows 3.1 forum.


Ask yourself - was there anything that you changed, software or hardware, not long before you had this problem? That's the most likely cause.

"I have left the system on before for days without problems."

Why? You should at least switch it off overnight.

Report •

July 5, 2010 at 07:14:34
I'm quite sure this Topic was in the Hardware forum yesterday when I answered it, but it's in the Dos forum now, that I failed to find yesterday.

It was, I moved it.

We moderators can do all sorts of weird and wonderful things.


Report •

July 5, 2010 at 10:20:07
Aha !

I wasn't aware moderators could move the saved Tracked Post link too

So -
OtheHill - Hardware forum moderator
StuartS - Dos forum moderator - are you the Windows 3.1 moderator too?

Report •

July 5, 2010 at 11:05:52

The tracking moves automatically with the post.

I share the Hardware forum with OtheHill. I can only move from hardware to anywhere else. Once it is in another forum it's out of my reach. Some one else has the DOS/Win 3.1 forums.

You can tell moderators by the star next their user name.


Report •

July 5, 2010 at 22:00:10
Yeah, a whiile back they renamed the dos forum 'disk operating system' in a futile attempt to hide it and keep non-dos queries from showing up there.

There were two different model 30's. The original was an 8086 or 8088 and then there was one that had a 286. The model 30 286 was so indicated on the case so it's easy to tell which one you have.

The original isn't going to run windows. The 286 might.

The error may have resulted from a hardware failure.

Those old machines weren't really designed to run all the time. There was no power down options for the cpu or hard drive. If you plan on leaving it for awhile it's best to turn it off.

Glass Packs--The sound of freedom.

Report •

Ask Question