delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: opendos/1997/04/21/15:19:51

To: mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca
Cc: ttoyooka AT verisim DOT com, ksinner AT solaria DOT sol DOT net, opendos AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Installation Problems
Message-ID: <19970421.145846.6447.0.editor@juno.com>
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 970421023439 DOT 5666A-100000 AT capslock DOT com>
From: editor AT juno DOT com (Bruce Morgen)
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 15:00:09 EDT

On Mon, 21 Apr 1997 02:47:41 -0400 (EDT) "Mike A. Harris"
<mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca> writes:
>On Sun, 20 Apr 1997, Bruce Morgen wrote:
>
>> >>After installing with the default configuration (Lite version),
>> >>and rebooting the computer, I get the following message (from my 
>> >memory):
>> >>"Bad or missing command interpreter".  I get past this by typing:
>> >>"C:\COMMAND.COM".  Also, the PATH variable is empty.  When I look 
>in
>> >>my 4dos directory, 4dos.exe is missing.
>> >
>> >I think you've answered your own question.  I assume that you've 
>> >installed
>> >4DOS into the CONFIG.SYS such that it gets started up automatically 
>on
>> >boot-up (You have SHELL=C:\...\4DOS.COM ... in your CONFIG.SYS).
>> >
>> >Somehow, your 4DOS.COM (It's .COM, not .EXE) has been deleted or 
>> >corrupted.
>> 
>> "Somehow" my foot, OD's brain-
>> damaged installer did the deed, 
>> same thing happened here -- I 
>> just replaced C:\4DOS\4DOS.COM 
>> from backup and all was well.  
>> The previous 4DOS.COM was just 
>> deleted, there was no file 
>> corruption.
>
>Relax a bit.  Since OD's installer can't know the name of EVERY
>command interpreter known to man, then it would be possible for
>them to detect 4DOS, but not ASSDFSGF.COM as a command
>interpreter.  Sure, they could put some more smarts into it to
>handle most situations, I don't disagree, but you have to
>understand what is happening.
>
>What has happened is that OD *SAVED* your previous DOS setup by
>renaming system files and hiding them.  I had this problem when I
>installed OD too.  The problem was that OD renamed
>C:\LOADLIN\LOADLIN.EXE to @COMPROC.OD or something like that and
>hid the file.  As a result, I was befuddled as to how LOADLIN
>wouldn't work anymore.  The problem is that the installer opens
>CONFIG.SYS and scans it for the *FIRST* "SHELL=" line.  This is
>*NORMALLY* your command interpreter, and so it backs up that file
>and then goes on to install itself...  Unfortunately, with
>multiconfigs in DOS and with tricks like LOADLIN, the installer
>breaks on custom setups.
>
In my case it failed on two 
perfectly ordinary setups, 
neither had multiple configs 
or more than one "SHELL=" 
statement.  In one case (an 
XT-architecture system with 
no memory management) it 
deleted/hid 4DOS.COM, in 
another (a 486 running QEMM 
as well as 4DOS) it did the 
same to QEMM's LOADHI.COM.  

>The solution?  CD into your 4DOS/LOADLIN/whatever directory and
>type ATTRIB.  You will see a hidden file.  Unhide this file and
>rename it to 4DOS.COM/LOADLIN.EXE or whatever.  Then edit your
>CONFIG.SYS and change the SHELL= line to whatever you're used to.
>There are other things that you may or may not have to change to
>get 4DOS or other processors working properly under OD, and these
>are covered in the FAQ, and are neither bugs in OD, nor bugs in
>4DOS.
>
I did nothing other than 
restoring the missing/hidden/
renamed or whatever files and 
(on the QEMM-equipped system) 
re-running OPTIMIZE.

>I'm almost positive that a future version of OD will prevent this
>sort of "brain damage" from happening.
>
Yes, if Caldera is aware of 
the installer's rude behavior 
I'm sure correcting it is 
something short of rocket 
science -- the way CONFIG.SYS 
is analyzed needs to be a tad 
more sophisticated, should be 
no big deal to fix.

>> >When it boots, it tries to start up 4DOS, but can't.  Hence, the 
>"Bad 
>> >or
>> >missing command interpreter" message.  When you type COMMAND.COM, 
>you 
>> >are
>> >starting it in place of 4DOS.  When you start the command 
>interpreter 
>> >in this way, it doesn't execute the AUTOEXEC.BAT.  Hence, your 
>empty 
>> >PATH.  Reinstall 4DOS, and your problem should be solved.
>> >
>> Easier and faster to simply 
>> replace the deleted file -- 
>> you *do* have a recent 
>> backup, don't you?  :-)
>
>Or, just rename it as I described above.
> 
Sure, if you've figured out 
what and where the renamed 
and hidden file is.  I've 
found no evidence of such 
on the XT, have yet to scan 
the 486.  :-)

>> >Or, if you can't re-install 4DOS, then you should change the 
>"SHELL=" 
>> >line
>> >in your CONFIG.SYS to read "SHELL=C:\COMMAND.COM", which will get 
>> >OpenDOS
>> >to start up the command interpreter that actually exists.  This 
>will 
>> >solve your problems, too, if you can stand using COMMAND.COM.  ;-)
>> >
>> The only procedures to make 
>> a 4DOS user tolerate 
>> COMMAND.COM involve harsh 
>> controlled substances or 
>> lobotomy surgery.  :-)
>
>Or acquiring the COMMAND.COM source code and coding 4DOS features
>into it yourself.  I would suspect that by the time that OpenDOS
>7.1 or 8.0 or whatever comes out that COMMAND.COM will not only
>be compiled on a FREE compiler, but also may compile on ANY
>compiler, and also will probably double or triple in size.
>(executable size, not resident size).
> 
Building up COMMAND.COM into 
something resembling a free 
4DOS would be quite a project, 
but a reasonable 4DOS subset 
could be implemented without 
too much trouble imho -- sort 
of like the ZCPR series of 
command processor replacements 
for CP/M 2.2, which were no 
bigger than the original DRI 
CCP but much less annoying to 
use.

>> >Also, I'd suggest doing a CHKDSK on your C: drive (or was there 
>some
>> >Caldera equivalent to MS SCANDISK?  Norton's NDD will work, too).  
>If 
>> >your 4DOS.COM was corrupted somehow, it's possible other files got 
>> >corrupted too; corrupted DOS filesystems should be fixed ASAP.
>> >
>> As I said, no file corruption 
>> was involved in my experience 
>> of this glitch, but running 
>> CHKDSK or SCANDISK is almost 
>> never a bad move.
>
>No, I think the problem is no big deal, a lack of foresight on
>the installer's part.  No corruption.  I even suspected
>corruption at first, but when I figured it out, I ice cream coned
>myself in the forehead.  :o)
>
>Take care.  TTYL
> 
Right back atcha, Mike, 
thanks for detailing the 
renegade installer's 
alleged quirk(s).

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019