Mail Archives: opendos/2003/11/29/20:46:02
> What exactly happens if you try to enable multitasking
> (DEVICE=EMM386.EXE MULTI [...] then load TASKMGR without /S)?
I haven't tried that - I'll give it a go tonight. I'm just used to the
task-switcher, so maybe this is a better way to go.
> Please read about ANSI and PROMPT in DOSBOOK.
I've tried to find it before, but couldn't see what I was looking for.
Maybe it was a bit obscure? I'll have another look.
> This huge BITCOM program is responsible for your connection, right?
Yes (I didn't realise it was huge until now). Even my WinModem works
okay when I use it (i.e. don't need the Win drivers). :-)
> If it was loaded before TASKMGR, it would (possibly) work better.
Could give that a try.
> trying to access modem from a few tasks simultaneously. (This is in no
> way specific to DR-DOS Task Switcher, it is due to the way that DOS task
> switchers work in general -- MS-DOS 5.0 DOSShell would probably behave
> quite similarly.)
Yes, I have found that once the modem gets used by a particular
session, then weird things happen when you try to use it from another
session, even after it's been hung-up. To use it okay from another session
you have to kill the original session it was running in.
> The programs that run in (8086-compatible) Real Mode of CPU can use
> extended memory only as a swap space (to move some data/code back and
> forth between lower 640 Kb and extended memory), but of course only if
> given program has such a feature built-in.
Other than bitcom and DR-DOS stuff (e.g. the editor), the only programs
I'm running are ones I've written myself. How do I build that in? (perhaps
that's a question for the FPC list)
> There are also programs which run in Protected Mode (either 16-bit, on
> 80286 and above, or 32-bit, on 80386 and above), which can use all
> memory directly. But they are different programs.
I've never written programs that directly access memory. I just write
the high-level code and let the OS take care of the particulars (that's
what it's for after all).
I seem to remember a few DR-DOS sources were made available a while
back - was the editor one of them?
> For example, if you have some Turbo Pascal source which doesn't mess
> with hardware and low-level stuff (no ASM insertions, direct access to
> BIOS, etc.), it should compile successfully under both Borland's TP and
> FreePascal. In the first case, you get a Real Mode executable program
> which can use directly only the low 640 Kb, in the second -- a 32-bit
> Protected Mode executable which runs on 80386 and above only, but can
> use directly all 46 Mb of your free extended memory.
Ah. Maybe I should take my old programs and re-compile them with FP?
:-) Doesn't solve the bitcom/editor problem though. :-( (unless the editor
source is available for me to re-compile)
> Some information about minimum memory requirements is stored in EXE file
> header,
How do I look at that? Is there a special editor or something? If I do
a "type" on it all I see is garbage.
> Nothing very unusual. You can probably eliminate SETVER, find
> a smaller CD-ROM driver (try, e.g., Acer/BenQ VIDE-CDD.SYS) or at
> least try to load them high (HIDEVICE=... or DEVICEHIGH=...), replace
> DRMOUSE with CTMOUSE (smaller and better), but it won't give you much
> more conventional memory, because BITCOM is such a huge moster.
How much memory would I need to run the editor? At the moment I do
"type filename|more" to look up stuff on my computer while online, but
obviously the editor is a more convenient method to use.
> There is something called SULFNBK (or similar) in Windows 9x,
I can try that if it's safe. I try not to look at that partition at all
while in Windows, so that it doesn't go dumping stuff there on me.
> If I need to have DOS and Windows on the same machine, I keep them on
> separate primary partitions. DOS partition is hidden when Windows run
> and no LFNs are stored.
Right. I have each OS on a separate partition, and 2 other partitions -
"data" which contains text files and Pascal programs (i.e. DOS stuff), and
"programs" which contains Windows programs and other binaries (pictures
and stuff). I keep the "data" partition visible to Windows so that I don't
have to re-boot if I want to quickly check something (and I look at it by
dropping into MS-DOS first, but still sometimes Windows is touching it for
some reason).
> SET PEXEC=C:\full\path\to\GREEN.EXE
Now why didn't I think of that? I already have some PEXEC stuff in
there. :-)
> > This says I have 46Mb available via XMS - how do I make the programs
> > use that?
>
> You don't. Unless they are written to use it, they *can't*.
Since I'm writing my own programs, I can. :-) The question is how?
> If they are written to use it, then they will be option settings of
> command line switchjes to tell them to use it.
Okay, I'll look into that.
> Well, that's one of the problems. Working with DOS at this level is
> *inherently* "technical".
I'm more software than hardware. I can explain to you how a computer
works, but if you put one in front of me to work on, it's just a disk and
a bunch of wires to me. :-) Like with cars - I can tell you about 2 stroke
vs. 4 stroke, how turbo-charging works, etc., but if my car's broken down
I wouldn't know where to start (other than looking for loose wires, which
was precisely my problem racing last week, only the loose wire wasn't in
the engine bay - it was under the back of the car at the fuel pump, and
wasn't found until after my first race :-( ).
> Desqview or Taskmgr effectively create separate "640k" (minus
> drivers)areas for each task.
So how do I make taskmgr do that (given that it's apparently not doing
that at the moment)? Go from task-switching to multi-tasking?
thanks all,
dp.
- Raw text -