Hi,
> BTW: did anyone ever try to run Intel NDIS network drivers with
> EMM386/JEMM ?
Yes, I do. EMM386/JEMM works great with all Intel NDIS drivers for the
100, 1000 and 1 Series.
Norbert.
-
This SF.net email is sponso
> I am not woried at all. I just wonder which should be used in a wider
> distribution... According to this current discussion, it looks like JEMM
> should ;-)
I have an idea. You could have a "compatible" configuration and a
"full feature" configuration. Second one should load latest JEMMEX and
Japheth escreveu:
> AFAIR this was a DPMI issue, using int 31h, ax=0300h with register CX != ZERO
> because the FD kernel returned CX > 0 in a DOS version call and MS-DOS
> returned cx == 0. This issue is unrelated to Himem or Emm386. You should
> provide a better example. :)
Sorry, I got a li
>> - FDHimem opens an "interrupt window" in v86-mode only. HimemX opens
>>an "interrupt window" in both v86- and real-mode.
> that was probably the point where Jack started his own civil war ;)
At least it WAS a bug, because this issue is mentioned in the XMS docs.
>> - in FDHimem the rout
Hi,
> Hi Japheth,
>
> Japheth escreveu:
>> Btw, in the name of how many people are you speaking exactly? And what do
>> you
>> regard as "well tested". Because, as for me, I seriously doubt that a
>> program
>> is "well tested" just because some dozens (or some hundreds? I have no idea
>> ho
>> We (many people in this list) espent months testing himem and emm386
>> from Michael Devore. Are those two just a bugfix from *that* well tested
>> version or is it descendent from somewhere else?
> As for HimemX: there are 12 bugfixes and some optimizations, all described in
> the readme.txt.
Hi Japheth,
Japheth escreveu:
> Btw, in the name of how many people are you speaking exactly? And what do you
> regard as "well tested". Because, as for me, I seriously doubt that a program
> is "well tested" just because some dozens (or some hundreds? I have no idea
> how big the FD user base
Hi Eric,
I am still in doubt: did he start from Michael's last and well tested
version or is it possible that it has bugs already fixed in Michael's
version?
Alain
Eric Auer escreveu:
> Hi Alain,
>
>>> If HIMEMX is "FreeDOS HIMEM plus some bugfixes by Japheth": Yes.
>>>
>>> OTHERWISE I recomm
>
> We (many people in this list) espent months testing himem and emm386
> from Michael Devore. Are those two just a bugfix from *that* well tested
> version or is it descendent from somewhere else?
As for HimemX: there are 12 bugfixes and some optimizations, all described in
the readme.txt.
Alain M. schreef:
> We (many people in this list) espent months testing himem and emm386
> from Michael Devore. Are those two just a bugfix from *that* well tested
> version or is it descendent from somewhere else?
>
Based on EMM386 from FreeDOS indeed. Japheth is just adding different
stuff
Hi Alain,
> > If HIMEMX is "FreeDOS HIMEM plus some bugfixes by Japheth": Yes.
> >
> > OTHERWISE I recommend to use JEMM386 (also on www.japheth.de)
> > which is an optimized and improved version of FreeDOS emm386.
> We (many people in this list) espent months testing himem and emm386
> from Mic
Hi all,
Eric Auer wrote:
> If HIMEMX is "FreeDOS HIMEM plus some bugfixes by Japheth": Yes.
>
> OTHERWISE I recommend to use JEMM386 (also on www.japheth.de)
> which is an optimized and improved version of FreeDOS emm386.
I also have doubts about this.
We (many people in this list) espent mont
Hi m4mach,
> I've notice some very strange thing. When I deleted all files from floppy
> image (apart from kernel) and then put them again it worked...
Probably because you accessed fewer sectors near the end then.
I think your problem is that HIMEM space or EMM386 space overlap
with MEMDISK spa
Hi
thank you for fast replies
I've notice some very strange thing. When I deleted all files from floppy
image (apart from kernel) and then put them again it worked... (don't ask me
how)
I'm ashamed for bothering you with such a trivial mistake, so maybe not to
make a dummy thread and use someh
14 matches
Mail list logo