In the course of off-list discussion, I tested this problem much more
extensively than I reported here. My own conclusion was similar to your
Situation #3: HIMEM and EMM386 are not at issue, and OpenGEM has one or more
incompatibilities with the FreeDOS kernel.
But I found further that the
Dnia środa 05 lipiec 2006 19:52, Henrique Peron napisał:
It should work for you in your AUTOEXEC.BAT file:
DISPLAY CON=(,,3)
MODE CON CODEPAGE PREPARE=((858,852) C:\FDOS\BIN\EGA.CPX)
MODE CON CODEPAGE PREPARE=((,,808) C:\FDOS\BIN\EGA3.CPX)
Then, you'll type MODE CON CODEPAGE SELECT=858 for
John Hupp wrote:
In the course of off-list discussion, I tested this problem much more
extensively than I reported here. My own conclusion was similar to your
Situation #3: HIMEM and EMM386 are not at issue, and OpenGEM has one or more
incompatibilities with the FreeDOS kernel.
But I
Hi,
DRDOS has DPMI. I assume FD could if it doesn't.
What is the exact technical reason you can't start WfW 3.11 from
FreeDOS? Is it the DPMI thing or something else?
I haven't looked much into this topic, but it cannot be the DPMI, as
when you run WIN then Microsoft's nice extender
Hi!
6-Июл-2006 22:10 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerry Hickman) wrote to
freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net:
You mean you booted into MS-DOS 6.22 and then started WfW from within
DOS 6.22? If so, I have to ask why??
GH No one has answered this part yet, especially why.
There _was_ answer. See
Hi!
7-Июл-2006 10:28 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerry Hickman) wrote to
freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net:
GH What is the exact technical reason you can't start WfW 3.11 from
GH FreeDOS? Is it the DPMI thing or something else?
Some differences in kernel structure. And some unimplemented in FD API
Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
John Hupp wrote:
In the course of off-list discussion, I tested this problem much more
extensively than I reported here. My own conclusion was similar to your
Situation #3: HIMEM and EMM386 are not at issue, and OpenGEM has one or more
incompatibilities with the
My (pure) FreeDOS installation was as loaded by the 0.9 Beta SR2 CD, except
that I updated the kernel and freecom.
I was using current *stable*:
kernel - 1.1.35 Build 2035b-cvs, 2006-05-21
freecom - 0.84-pre XMS_Swap, 2006-05-21
himem + emm386 - from emmx208 or emm208x ZIP archive (though that
Hi Arkady,
GH Yes, but is it not the case that the startup files are different, plus
Startup files are same.
Can you clarify what you mean here? How do you define same?
Wrong. MS-DOS 6.22 was much newer and it recommended to use
himem/emm386 from it, instead native ones.
Maybe
Hi!
8-Июл-2006 22:29 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerry Hickman) wrote to
freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net:
GH Yes, but is it not the case that the startup files are different, plus
Startup files are same.
GH Can you clarify what you mean here? How do you define same?
Identical or newer
Uploaded to ftp://ftp.devoresoftware.com/downloads/emm386/ are the files
emmx210.zip, EMM386 version 2.10 and HIMEM version 3.13 memory managers,
mostly executables; and emms210.zip, source code files for the new release.
The latest revisions (effectively completed in May) contain several
At 10:18 PM 7/8/2006 -0500, Michael Devore wrote:
a bunch of stuff, but forgot to mention something people asked me about
earlier
I used the newest release UPX 2.01d to compress this version of EMM386 and
HIMEM. It saved about 400 bytes for EMM386.EXE and 200 bytes for HIMEM.EXE
over the old
12 matches
Mail list logo
