Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 08:09:50 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Jason Green <news AT jgreen4 DOT fsnet DOT co DOT uk>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: to del a window ...
In-Reply-To: <qbckns43majfdkoa14u1m1a355plrokllg@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000723080812.29648B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 23 Jul 2000, Jason Green wrote:

> > I switch back to 80x25 or 80x50 on close; it doesn't matter.
> 
> Ahem, it matters very much if you want to work in DOS with more than
> 50 lines.  I'm not suggesting that 3-pixel chars would be of any use;
> just curious as to how the command line behaves.
> 
> The Linux console can be switched to 80x60 with standard VGA.  So I am
> suggesting that we could do this too, assuming command.com doesn't get
> upset by more than 50 lines.

I think versions of COMMAND.COM from DOS 5.0 and later all honor the 
number of screen lines as it is known to BIOS.  If you can switch into 
80x60 in a way that causes the BIOS to know you have 60 lines, 
COMMAND.COM will DTRT.