> >> The routine is perfect. It just doesn't work under DOS (neither in
> >> BDOS1) and works great under Basic.
> >Well okay send it to me and I'll make it work.
>
> I've already sent it to the list some time ago. Well, I'll write a
little
> program with it and send it to you, so it'll be more easy for you.
> I really thank you if you discover what is the problem!
k.
> >> You do not understand. There is no real problem. It's just something
> >> bizarre. Something that DOS do that Basic do not.
> >Hmmm... I bet it isn't.
>
> Well... I just do not know anymore... (-: I'm confused about it.
Everything I
> do on ASM works, unless it uses VDP direct acess/VDP memory acess... (-:
Then you do something wrong accessing the VDP.
Dos has NOTHING to do with VDP access...
> >> BDOSEMU, that do exactly this task, but runs a DOS program under UZIX.
> >> The only limit is that the program cannot use more than the first 32Kb
> >(AFAIK).
> >Which IS a limit... Never heard of memorymapping???
>
> Yes, it uses Memory Mapping for Task Switching... 31 processes with 1Mb.
oh.
> >Well, ofcourse. It's
> >programmed in C, isn't it?
>
> The basic and problematic functions are made in ASM. Look at the
> Uzix page. I think it's the most advanced MSX Project being developed
> now. I really think you never run Uzix. It's multtask. It's faster than
MSXDOS
> (when on HardDisk, using FDEmulation). It's UNIX! (-:
> The Homepage is:
>
> http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~adrcunha/uzix/
>
> The problem of memory mapping is VERY complex under MSX, when
> using multitask. And no, Uzix IS NOT an MSXDOS program. It's an entirely
> new OS, not using even BDOS for a lot of things... It's on the way you
like it.
> (-;
Yeah duh, I'm not stupid...
But anyways, I'll stick to Dos, more easy to me, full functionality and I
know how to work with/program it. Uzix is nice but still in beta stage, too
limited memory, and I absolutely know NOTHING about Unix.
> >> Maybe yes, Maybe not. The only change would be that you would receive
> >> a Process ID. And you'll have to kill this ID when exiting the
program...
> >Well sorry but I think it really has no use in a non-multitasking
> >environment.
>
> Well... Implementing this would be possible to make a MSXDOS2 taskswitch
> version without many problems. This is important on a taskswitch, not only
> on multitask.
But that wasn't what the developers had in mind...
> >> It's strange. I'm trying to create a utility to change BDOS2->BDOS1
> >on-the-fly (without
> >> reset), but there is some strange problem. The first strange fact is
that
> (...)
> >> Some times ALL names are shown... And If I exec a TYPE command, the
system
> >> hangs... It's weird. But when I was trying this I have not BrMSX2.0...
Now
> >I'll try it again.
> >Err... do you simply imitate the boot-routine??? (loading the MSXDOS.SYS
at
> >#100?) If so, it really should work.
> >Ofcourse, before doing this you should first delete the MSXDOS2.SYS
> >patches... (MSXDOS2.SYS hooks #F3FD and patches most routines...) (so
you've
> >got to 'unhook'...)
>
> I tryed, but it doesn't work. Try yourself!
Too much work and I see no real use (at least not for my current system).
(current system: MSX2(+), SCSI + 2xHD (80/60MB), 2MB MemMap, MoonSound)
> The problem seems to be a lot more
> difficult. Why? Because I'm trying continue using the disk controler where
is BDOS2!
> Why? Because I want to use BDOS1 only programs on my MegaSCSI, which has
> BDOS2 installed!
> I just want to swap the kernels, not reset everything. Of course, it'll
"fall" into MSXDOS1,
> but this is not the idea. The idea is use something like:
>
> DOS1 program.name
>
> And the loader would change the BDOS version and load the program into
memory,
> and run as BDOS2 never was present. If it was a simple task, there would
be a program
> to do this already.
Well there already is MAP.COM (never didn't work), and further I think you
should just make sure to have cleared all hooks Dos sets... But err... All
Dos2 routines are Dos1-compatible!!! The only thing you must keep in account
is the memorymapping I think... As long as the Dos-kernel in the last 2
pages isn't overwritten...
Solution for some programs might be to use the smallest mapper for the Dos
kernel and set the other mapper as the TPA, for the programs...
Don't know if it will work but it's worth a try.
> [Z280]
> >Too bad...
>
> Well... Z280 is discontinued at this time. Z80 and Z38x are the only
> processors available from Zilog. Now it's too late to cry... )-:
Z380 is still available by the way? I heard some rumour it couldn't be
acquired anymore...
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or ICQ: 10196372
visit the Datax homepage at http://datax.cjb.net/
MSX fair Bussum / MSX Marathon homepage: http://msxfair.cjb.net/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put
in the body (not subject) "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the
quotes :-) Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] (www.stack.nl/~wiebe/mailinglist/)
****
