On 8/24/06, Arkady V.Belousov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >X:\>del z:\drvlist.txt [Yes=ENTER, No=ESC]?
> >x:\>rem shsurdrv /qq /u>NUL [Yes=ENTER, No=ESC] ?
> >X:\>if !C: [Yes=E==! set destdrv=C: [Yes=ENTER, No=ESC] ?
>
> This something new. Interesting, what will happen with my patch? If
> si
Hehe, I had a card for our 8088 that accelerated it to faster-than-286
speed according to the manual. I think it helped to accept the 286
instruction set as well. You could turn it on and off via a switch.
On 8/23/06, Michael Devore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 05:25 PM 8/23/2006 -0500, I wro
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> At 06:22 PM 8/23/2006 -0400, Lyrical Nanoha wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
>>
>>> Not good enough? Probably not. I'll compress EMM386 with the option next
>>> time, but unless a person with an 8086 is available for pre-testing, i
At 03:23 AM 8/24/2006 +0400, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
>Hi! 24-á×Ç-2006 01:01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Japheth) wrote to
>freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net: >> Welp, anyone who has an 8088 or
>8086, or 80186 or 80188, EMM386, >> respectively, and report their
>results. It should kick out a message f
Hi!
24-Авг-2006 01:01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Japheth) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> Welp, anyone who has an 8088 or 8086, or 80186 or 80188, or 80286, can try
>> test EXE's at ftp://ftp.devoresoftware.com/download/emm386 called
>> HIMKIK86.EXE and EMMKIK86.EXE for --8086 compressed
>
> Welp, anyone who has an 8088 or 8086, or 80186 or 80188, or 80286, can try
> test EXE's at ftp://ftp.devoresoftware.com/download/emm386 called
> HIMKIK86.EXE and EMMKIK86.EXE for --8086 compressed HIMEM and EMM386,
> respectively, and report their results. It should kick out a message for
At 05:25 PM 8/23/2006 -0500, I wrote:
> >MD> not make a difference. Does anybody here have an 8086 and can act as a
> >MD> test subject in a reasonable turn-around time frame?
> >
> > You yourself?
>
>Nope, I haven't had an 8086 in over a decade. Maybe two.
Come to think of it, it wasn't a
At 06:22 PM 8/23/2006 -0400, Lyrical Nanoha wrote:
>On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
>
> > Not good enough? Probably not. I'll compress EMM386 with the option next
> > time, but unless a person with an 8086 is available for pre-testing, it may
> > not make a difference. Does anybody he
At 02:21 AM 8/24/2006 +0400, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
>MD> but unless a person with an 8086 is available for pre-testing, it may
>
> Isn't your emulators allow to emulate 8086?
Isn't anything in VPC or Qemu, unless it's a hidden advanced option like
UPX does. Somebody could develop a singl
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> Not good enough? Probably not. I'll compress EMM386 with the option next
> time, but unless a person with an 8086 is available for pre-testing, it may
> not make a difference. Does anybody here have an 8086 and can act as a
> test subject in a reason
Hi!
23--2006 16:54 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Devore) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>>UPX. Why you don't use "--8086" option when packing?
MD> option? Because I don't have an 8086 to test and until just now, nobody
MD> else on the list had one available, so it didn't matter?
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> At 11:02 PM 8/23/2006 +0200, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
>
>>> And how about emm386 and himem?
>>
>> HIMEM.EXE (HIMEM64 3.12) crashes on "shl cx,4" even when invoked
>> as "himem /?".
>> Same problem with HIMEM64 3.23.
>> Same problem with EMM386.EXE 2.08
Hi!
18-Авг-2006 21:04 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Markus Laire) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>A:\>if not errorlevel 4 getargs > temp.bat [Yes=ENTER, No=ESC] ?
ML> # I needed to press ENTER twice on the line above
This is right: first time you confirm "if not errorlevel", second time
At 01:48 AM 8/24/2006 +0400, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
>Hi! 23-á×Ç-2006 16:16 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Devore)
>wrote to freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net: >>HIMEM.EXE (HIMEM64 3.12)
>crashes on "shl cx,4" even when invoked >>as "himem /?". MD> That's from
>UPX. Why you don't use "--8086
Hi!
23-Авг-2006 16:16 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Devore) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>>HIMEM.EXE (HIMEM64 3.12) crashes on "shl cx,4" even when invoked
>>as "himem /?".
MD> That's from UPX.
Why you don't use "--8086" option when packing?
--
At 11:02 PM 8/23/2006 +0200, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
> > And how about emm386 and himem?
>
>HIMEM.EXE (HIMEM64 3.12) crashes on "shl cx,4" even when invoked
>as "himem /?".
>Same problem with HIMEM64 3.23.
>Same problem with EMM386.EXE 2.08.
>Same problem with EMM386.EXE 2.23.
That's from UPX.
Hello Eric,
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:48:38PM +0200, Eric Auer wrote:
> Hoi, mem 1.9a2 is not current - Blair should have 1.9a3 somewhere.
MEM.EXE 1.9a2 is part of the Beta9sr2 ISO.
Strangely, the 1.0-Testing ISO does not contain MEM 1.9a3
but MEM 1.7 (which also crashes). Oh wait, some confusi
1.9a3 is in FreeDOS 1.0, and it was contributed a long time ago by
David O'Shea (don't know what happened to him though; he said he would
be unavailable while moving IIRC, but that was a while ago).
On 8/23/06, Imre Leber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Base list still shows:
>
> MEM 1.7 Bart Oldem
Base list still shows:
MEM 1.7 Bart Oldeman
Jim should decide wether to take the 1.9 from that other side. Was it ever
contributed? Maybe the author should be contacted.
Imre
>-Original Message-
>From: Bernd Blaauw [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 05:16 PM
Arkady V.Belousov schreef:
> Hi!
>
> 23-Авг-2006 07:57 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joris van Rantwijk) wrote to
> freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>
> JvR> MEM.EXE 1.9a2 seems to crash on a 8086.
>
> Where you get this version? CVS contains 1.6 (or is it 1.7? MEM_MINOR
> contains 7).
>
http://wi
Hi!
23-Авг-2006 07:57 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joris van Rantwijk) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
JvR> MEM.EXE 1.9a2 seems to crash on a 8086.
Where you get this version? CVS contains 1.6 (or is it 1.7? MEM_MINOR
contains 7).
JvR> I believe the crash is caused by a bug in the 386-
Hi!
23--2006 10:16 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Markus Laire) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> All looks fine. How to reproduce bug in FreeCOM with redirection at
>> singlestepping?
ML> I'm able to reproduce this in qemu:
Oops, sorry. Before patch not accepted yet, let me replace it b
Hi!
ML> I'm able to reproduce this in qemu:
BTW, revised previous patch (for LFNFUNCS.C), because TC doesn't
support MS-like names for attributes.
diff -rup -x config.mak OLD/# NEW/#
--- OLD/# 2006-08-22 20:04:52.0 +
+++ NEW/# 2006-08-23 00:55:36.0 +
@@ -1
Hi!
23--2006 10:16 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Markus Laire) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> All looks fine. How to reproduce bug in FreeCOM with redirection at
>> singlestepping?
ML> I'm able to reproduce this in qemu:
Fixed - see patch in attachment. Blair?
diff -rup -x config.mak
Hi!
23-Авг-2006 10:16 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Markus Laire) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
>> All looks fine. How to reproduce bug in FreeCOM with redirection at
>> singlestepping?
ML> I'm able to reproduce this in qemu:
>>type test.bat
ML> if not errorlevel 4 echo abc > temp
>>command
On 8/23/06, Arkady V.Belousov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> >type test.bat
> echo echo>test
>
> >command /y /c test
> >test [Yes=ENTER, No=ESC] ? y
> >echo echo>test
> >echo echo>test [Yes=ENTER, No=ESC] ? y
>
> >type test
> echo
>
> All looks fine. How to reproduce bug in FreeCOM with redir
26 matches
Mail list logo
