On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 16:37:47 -0600, Jim Hall wrote:
Okay, we can stop the discussion now. I've gotten *lots* of email asking to keep UDMA in 'base', and none yet to say it should be in 'util'.
Consider UDMA a new resident of 'base'. :-)
Thanks, Aitor, Bernd, Erwin, Jim, Johnson, Steve, and all
Hi,
Jim Hall escribió:
Begin3
Title: mode-modecon
Wouldn't it be easier just to call it MODE?
Aitor
---
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps Web services for Linux with
a free DVD
Hi, I noticed that I have not yet enabled the MODE LPTn COLS=...
feature. Reason: Nobody tested / suggested ESC sequences for
10cpi (80 column) / 15cpi (132 column) printing yet. So please test
the sequences below, which are Google-educated guesses:
ESC P
10 cpi printing. Could also be reached
Aitor Santamaría Merino wrote:
Hi,
Jim Hall escribió:
Begin3
Title: mode-modecon
Wouldn't it be easier just to call it MODE?
Aitor
Yes. I had just used Eric's package name as the name in the LSM, but
Eric asked me to change it. It's already updated at:
Hi, I noticed that I have not yet enabled the MODE LPTn COLS=...
feature. Reason: Nobody tested / suggested ESC sequences for
10cpi (80 column) / 15cpi (132 column) printing yet. So please test
the sequences below, which are Google-educated guesses:
ESC P
10 cpi printing. Could also be reached
Sounds like rxcopy is the preferred one, at least a few people have
reported so.
If no objections by morning, I'll deprecate Joe's xcopy, and promote
rxcopy to be the FreeDOS xcopy.
-jh
Eric Auer wrote:
Hi, for some odd reason, RXCOPY was not the default for a while.
When we changed to the
What does the list think about Eric's suggestion? Scandisk seems
non-functional at this point - at least for me, it doesn't really do
anything. The entry in the 1.0 To-do list for Scandisk is use the
interface with CHKDSK code which seems to be the right thing to do.
Sounds like taking
Heh. Ignore that one. We answered this one about a month ago.
Consider Scandisk dropped from the Software List.
-jh
Jim Hall wrote:
What does the list think about Eric's suggestion? Scandisk seems
non-functional at this point - at least for me, it doesn't really do
anything. The entry in
Alain wrote:
Steve Nickolas escreveu:
At Fri, 20 Feb 2004 3:19pm -0500, togermano.com wrote:
Don't you think its better to use Msdos file names? So like a program
can edit it. And its easyer for people that know msdos file names
instead of like fddos for a directory etc..
Opinions vary but I
Hi!
DOS- all exe/com/sys files
DOS\APPINFO- lsm files
DOS\DOC\project- documentation for 'project'
DOS\HELP - all help files
DOS\NLS- national language support files
DOS\SOURCE\project - source code for 'project'
Sounds okay BUT
Hi,
--- Jim Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Alain
wrote:
My thought would be to put them inside C:\DOS as
subdirs.
For example:
DOS- all exe/com/sys files
DOS\APPINFO- lsm files
DOS\DOC\project- documentation for 'project'
DOS\HELP - all help
Hi Eric,
Thanks for your explanation!
And I should have known better.
[This is a reply to the question by BAHCL: What if
DOS\HELP ends up
to contain several files which are all called
readme? Answer: This
does not happen. PG would only be allowed to have
files DOS\HELP\PG
and
12 matches
Mail list logo
