From: "Robert van der Boon" <rjvdboon AT europe DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 22:04:45 +0100
Subject: Re: PMODE/DJ (was Re: ANNOUNCE: Bison 1.28 ported to DJGPP)
References: <01a9c2228200530NET088S AT hetnet DOT nl>
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000306095337.9921K-100000@is>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12a)
Message-ID: <0645d1708210730NET090S@hetnet.nl>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com



On 6 Mar 00, at 9:54, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Mar 2000, Robert van der Boon wrote:
> > On the subject of PMODE/DJ: did anyone ever notice that it doesn't work 
> > if one start plain msdos, with:
> > device=emm386.exe NOEMS NOVCPI
> > and then tries to execute a PMODE/DJ executable? I never succeeded to do 
> > this.
> 
> Why do you need NOVCPI?  Does it work if you remove it?

There is no real need voor NOVCPI, it just saves another 4k of UMB's., 
although I used to use a program (electronic banking) that did not work 
if I had NOEMS without NOVCPI. The PMODE/DJ executable does work if I 
remove NOVCPI from the line. It also works with NOVCPI, but only as long 
as you don't allocate (much) memory ('unzip32 -h' works,
'unzip32 -l SomeFile.zip' doesn't)

It is only a small problem for me (so small that I didn't bring it 
before), but as it seems that more programs for first-time users of 
DJGPP (unzip32, zippo) are going to use PMODE/DJ, I thought I'd bring up 
this issue.

> In all other cases, my advice is to stay away of PMODE/DJ, since it is
> much less debugged and is not actively maintained.

That would be my advice too, yes,
 Robert


rjvdboon AT europe DOT com
Renkum: bijna zo mooi als Bilderdam...