Re: MDAC > 2.5?

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #105,436 by acagle 6/9/03 5:51:43 PM Reply	Re: MDAC > 2.5? I tried 2.7 and that didn't do anything. I briefly thought I had it fixed by using the DAO 3.51 instead of 3.6; it worked for a while, but now it's doing the same thing again. I think I will have to enlist the Uber-nerd from downstairs for one final attempt before I reformat the whole $)@#$^*(#&$^ thing.
Post #105,517 by deSitter 6/10/03 11:18:20 AM Reply	Re: MDAC > 2.5? Curious - don't some of the latter versions of Windows (since ME) have silent "system restore"? After installing DAO of proper version, set a checkpoint ("System Information" tool, "System File Checker" in Windows 98SE), so the thing doesn't get rolled back. This is what sucks the most about Windows - diagnosing problems in the dark. -drl
Post #105,519 by acagle 6/10/03 12:05:25 PM Reply	Re: MDAC > 2.5? If only their error messages wouldn't be so darned helpful. . . . .

More Access problems -- this time with SQL Server, too! - (acagle) - (9) - May 27, 2003, 04:10:12 PM EDT

No solution for that context... - (ChrisR) - May 27, 2003, 04:21:07 PM EDT

Hmmmmm. . . . . . - (acagle) - May 28, 2003, 12:37:19 PM EDT

DAMN IT, this is infuriating. - (acagle) - (6) - June 9, 2003, 01:27:22 PM EDT

MDAC > 2.5? - (deSitter) - (5) - June 9, 2003, 01:32:12 PM EDT

Re: MDAC > 2.5? - (acagle) - (4) - June 9, 2003, 03:31:00 PM EDT

Re: MDAC > 2.5? - (deSitter) - (3) - June 9, 2003, 04:08:23 PM EDT

Re: MDAC > 2.5? - (acagle) - (2) - June 9, 2003, 05:51:43 PM EDT

Re: MDAC > 2.5? - (deSitter) - (1) - June 10, 2003, 11:18:20 AM EDT

Re: MDAC > 2.5? - (acagle) - June 10, 2003, 12:05:25 PM EDT

Obeying the Three Laws of Thermodynamics since 2001.
61 ms