Perhaps.
I haven't tried this, so I don't know if the LSPPP output is "messy"
or not (eg., with the "twirly" progress indicator ...). If the consensus
is to include the LSPPP output in PPP.LOG, then I'll be happy to ...
WRT the "lh" issue - my memory tells me that with DR-DOS 7.02,
and possibly other versions, a failure to load high will not always
(ever?) load low instead. So, I don't think I'll add "lh" to the command
(sorry;-).
Joe.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clarence Verge [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 9 January 2001 7:04
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: LSPPP made easy - update
>
> Glenn McCorkle wrote:
> >
> > One suggestion for sub-pppd.bat
> >
> > @lh lsppp.exe > NUL
> > (^^ will load lsppp.exe into upper memory if enough is free)
> > (if not, then it will load into low memory)
>
> What's wrong with:
> @lh lsppp.exe >>PPP.log ?
>
> Doesn't it make sense to have some debug info available ?
>
> - Clarence Verge
> --
> - Help stamp out FATWARE. As a start visit: http://home.arachne.cz/
> --
>
