From:	"Thomas Mueller" <tmueller AT bluegrass DOT net>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: conflict.
Date:	12 Dec 2002 05:06:23 GMT
Lines:	23
Message-ID:	<at95ge$11vr6d$4@ID-49635.news.dfncis.de>
References:	<Pine DOT OSF DOT 4 DOT 44 DOT 0212091855370 DOT 16117-100000 AT axpts2 DOT ts DOT infn DOT it> <2110-Mon09Dec2002220401+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	tnt01-95-180.bluegrass.net (216.135.95.180)
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	fu-berlin.de 1039669583 35646669 216.135.95.180 (16 [49635])
X-Mailer:	NOS-BOX 2.05
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 18:58:42 +0100 (MET)
> From: "Riccardo Fantoni (Pastore)" <rfantoni AT ts DOT infn DOT it>
>
> some file utilities (ls.exe for example)
> conflict with the scrollbar of the
> command shell. Is there any workaround
> for this problem ?

Eli Zaretskii responded:

> I don't think there is a work-around, sorry.  Any DOS program that
> accesses the video memory directly will cause this unpleasant
> side-effect.  I consider this a misfeature of the NT family of
> Windows.

What about a full-screen DOS command-prompt session, with no scrollbar, or is
that not available in Windows XP?  My experience is with OS/2, not Windows, and
OS/2 from 2.0 to Warp 4.0 always had available full-screen or windowed DOS and
OS/2 command-prompt sessions, and the full-screen command-prompt session had no
scrollbar.  OS/2 DOS sessions also allowed graphic resolutions higher than
640 * 480.

- Raw text -