Or Botton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Well, the P350 is alive again! <insert cheesy lightning effect here>.
"Now all I need is a brain."
"Yes, Herr Doktor Gatesenschtein! At once!"
>This time i'm planning to use PC-DOS 2000 instead of MS-DOS 6.22
>(which I'm going to keep on a boot-disk. You may never know.)
>
>And here's the problem:
>If i'll install Win95 after installing PC-DOS 2000 first, will
>Win95 'replace' it with 'MS-DOS 7', or will it give you the
>option to boot it as if it was MS-DOS 6.22?
The Windows 95 dual-boot code has been broken from OSR2 on, *except*
<drum roll> .... except when your "old version of DOS" is PC-DOS.
Dual-booting between Win95 and MS-DOS worked by renaming the kernel
files. Dual-booting between Win95 and PC-DOS does not rename the
kernel files, since they already have different names.
Microsoft: Even their bugs don't function as intended.
>Also, if I manage to install Win95 on top of PC-DOS 2000 without
>a problem, what about DR-DOS 7.02+? Both PC-DOS 2000 and DR-DOS
>are using IBMBIO.COM and IBMSYS.COM files. Wouldnt those conflict/delete
>each other? (when using the DR-DOS Loader, and I dont have any access
>to any other boot-loaders.)
Ah, but, but.... <vague memory stirring in the murky depths of memory>
I seem to recall that the DR-DOS kernel files can be given different
extensions. In fact, I think that the SYS command has an undocumented
switch to do exactly that. Whether this would work with LOADER is
another question, of course. Let us know how your experiment turns
out, Doktor. "It is alive!"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
