On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 01:59:24 +0100 (CET), Richard Menedetter wrote:

> Hi

> "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>>> SH> I try to optimize my CONFIG.SYS and my AUTOEXEC.BAT for use with
>>> SH> DOS and WIN 95 ignores these files as if they weren't even
>>> SH> there.
>>> So you mean if you tell it to load smartdrv or some other driver, it
>>> is NOT present when you reboot ??

>>> I don't think that this is possible.

> SH> It has been so long since I've played with the CONFIG.SYS and
> SH> AUTOEXEC.BAT that I've forgotten exactly what kinds of things I tried
> SH> to load, and in what sequence.  All I remember is that it doesn't work
> SH> like a normal operating system and it doesn't recognize commands that
> SH> are clearly there and found in the specified path.  WIN 95 is so
> SH> screwed up that it doesn't even respond to a simple statement such as
> SH> "path=c:\;c:\util".  Any normal version of DOS would understand the
> SH> statement and act accordingly.

> DOS 7.0 recognizes every valid DOS command.
> PS: this has to be set path=c:\
> (set !)

Why SET?  You don't have to use SET with Caldera 7.02 DR-DOS, or with
MS-DOS 5.00.  What is the point in using a combined statement when just
one statement ought to work? "path=c:\;c:\util" is a single statement and
it works with a normal DOS version.

> Maybe we can help you, if you give an example of something that doesn't
> work. (it's sure a problem at your end, because I have tried many, many
> things and haven't encountered a single bug, dos 7 behaves exactly as
> msdos 6.22)

I've never used MS-DOS 6.22.  You have just now given me another good reason
not to ever try it.  I've never heard anything good about MS-DOS 6.22.

> SH> BTW, I see that you are using 4DOS.  Many list members have posted
> SH> messages about experiencing problems with 4DOS, especially with
> SH> Arachne.  Maybe you can help them.
> Usually it was me having problems.

> The solution posted here many times is, to simply delete all [xxx] values
> from MIME.cfg

Sam Heywood

-- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client

Reply via email to