Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

Don, in my opinion this is a SHELL bug. after executing a program (being it command.com or dataperfect), shell does some 'cleanup' code. it simply thinks that all (MZ) memory blocks above SHELL.EXE are leftovers from external execution, and calls DOSfree(). if they are leftover PSPs, the

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

Tom, I'll defer to your expertise and consider it so on my end as well; thanks for taking the time to debug it. On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote: > Don, > > in my opinion this is a SHELL bug. > > after executing a program (being it command.com or

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

On Jun 8, 2016 2:05 PM, "Bret Johnson" wrote: > > This actually sounds similar to a problem I was having with FreeDOS, which I needed to work around in my programs. In my case, the problem is actually with how FreeDOS allocates memory. I don't know for sure if this is the

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

This actually sounds similar to a problem I was having with FreeDOS, which I needed to work around in my programs. In my case, the problem is actually with how FreeDOS allocates memory. I don't know for sure if this is the same thing or not, but it could be related. In my particular case,

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

Hi Bret, the problem of using but not reserving memory for the kernel in FreeDOS sounds vaguely similar to the problem of HMA usage in DOS in general: DOS installs trampoline handlers outside HMA which make sure that the HMA is actually enabled before DOS calls code there. Maybe a similar

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

I'm going to try a couple of things in DOS 5.0 and DOS 6.20, I'll be back. On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Eric Auer wrote: > > Hi Bret, > > the problem of using but not reserving memory for the kernel in FreeDOS > sounds vaguely similar to the problem of HMA usage in DOS in

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

Hi Don, you probably misunderstood me. I said that DOS in general has security code in the kernel to make sure that the HMA is activated before parts of the kernel which are stored in HMA get used. The security code itself is kept outside the HMA... What exactly were you testing with FAT32 and

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

I just tried this on Compaq DOS 5.0 with Compaq Himem only with no errors and no missing paths. So unless it's a FAT32 problem it must go back to FreeDOS somehow??? On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Don Flowers wrote: > I'm going to try a couple of things in DOS 5.0 and DOS

Re: [Freedos-user] command / shell conflict

Hi Eric, I did misunderstand, I get it now. As far as the Compaq DOS experiement is was on a FAT16 whereas all my FreeDOSs are in FAT32 (some as large as 100GB). On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Eric Auer wrote: > > Hi Don, > > you probably misunderstood me. I said that DOS