On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 20:05:58 -0500, Clarence Verge wrote:
<snip>
>> Don't believe everything you read in the documentation. ;-)
>> According to this, LH won't work with "third-party" memory managers.
> Good on YOU.<g>
> But what about non-DR/OpenDOS users ?
Since I'm not a "non-DR/Opendos user".
I can't answer that question. ;-)
> The last question was: Is there a better way ?
> So tell us. IS LH (with OpenDOS) better than QEMM's Loadhi ? (.sys and .com)
I've just tested both "LH" and "loadhi.com"
Both of them load lsppp.exe into upper memory at d2c0:0000
So, which is better?......
Niether is better (or worse), than the other.
They are both exactly the same.
Except for the fact that since "LH" is built into command.com, it
requires no additional disk space for holding another .com file. ;-)
> When using QEMM I have ALWAYS used loadhi instead of devicehigh and LH.
> It wasn't a matter of being warned off by the documentation.
OK then.
Why *do* you use loadhi.com instead of lh ??? ;-)
> Why would they bother to write and include them if they aren't either
> needed or useful ?
A very good question.
To which I must answer.....I don't know.
Why did M$ write their own LFN format instead of using the
"tried and true" Unix/Linux format? ;-)
--
Glenn
(your friendly neighborhood compu-nerd)
http://arachne.cz/
http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/
http://freedos-32.sourceforge.net/
