Re: [Freedos-devel] HIMEM64 testing info/requests

2004-04-08 Thread Patrick J. LoPresti
Michael Devore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, reversion to original A20 test is going to be the final mod > tried before I declare the BIOS rogue, or possibly a subtle-bugged > application. Yuck. > Although the new A20 test code should work, as it does fine in many > machines and the logic i

Re: [Freedos-devel] HIMEM64 testing info/requests

2004-04-08 Thread Patrick J. LoPresti
Michael Devore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Of course, I should say enabled here, rather than disabled. I think "disabled" is correct, assuming "disabled" is a synonym for "closed". (As in, the gate is closed, so it does not pass anything, so the A20 line is "disabled" and fixed at 0.) Actuall

Re: [Freedos-devel] HIMEM64 testing info/requests

2004-04-08 Thread Michael Devore
At 03:10 PM 4/8/2004 -0500, Michael Devore wrote: >I'm not sure FreeDOS can assume HIMEM has the first shot at machine hardware in its >initial state. It certainly doesn't under VMware, which we have do FreeDOS users >running under. Does VMware reset A20 back to known disabled state at startu

Re: [Freedos-devel] HIMEM64 testing info/requests

2004-04-08 Thread Michael Devore
At 02:46 PM 4/8/2004 -0400, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote: >Michael Devore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I added enable/disable test, but the report was that it still fails, >> after working for the startup test. Which either means the BIOS is >> bugged and fails under stress, or there is something

Re: [Freedos-devel] HIMEM64 testing info/requests

2004-04-08 Thread Patrick J. LoPresti
Michael Devore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I added enable/disable test, but the report was that it still fails, > after working for the startup test. Which either means the BIOS is > bugged and fails under stress, or there is something very weird > going on. Like the test_a20 code failing...

Re: [Freedos-devel] HIMEM64 testing info/requests

2004-04-08 Thread Michael Devore
At 10:52 AM 4/8/2004 -0400, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote: >It sounds like you cannot trust the BIOS status code, so you need to >test whether it really enabled/disabled the gate. Or, just tell the >user their BIOS is buggy and to get a new machine. :-) I added enable/disable test, but the report w

Re: [Freedos-devel] MEM? How about 'Central Point's MI'

2004-04-08 Thread Johnson Lam
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 12:39:38 +, you wrote: Hi BAHCL, >I hope you remember PG, it works in such purposes. >Try: > dir /s | pg > mem /d | pg > >all information are scrollable back and forth Yes I know. But usually I use "PG {filename}", and I think MORE or LESS or PG is for the program that

[Freedos-devel] failure notice

2004-04-08 Thread MAILER-DAEMON
Hi. This is the qmail-send program at sinamail.com. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: 500 ¿Ë·Rªººô¤Í¡A±z©Ò¶Ç°eªº¶l¥ó«H½cªÅ¶¡¤w¶W¹L sinamail 5M ªº­­¨î¡I½Ðµy«á¦A¸Õ¸Õ¬

Re: [Freedos-devel] HIMEM64 testing info/requests

2004-04-08 Thread Patrick J. LoPresti
Michael Devore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Great. Now that HIMEM is getting wider distribution to the eager > hundreds or thousands, I've additionally collected problem reports > with buggy BIOS support for BIOS method and a failing A20 always on > method. It's like a dam busted somewhere upst