HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Re: Intel CodeBuilder
Date: 9 Jan 1993 14:46:09 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1993Jan08.215255.5697@qdeck.com> garyrich@qdeck.com (Gary Rich) writes:
>As for DJGPP, it currently uses VCPI.  For now at least I think we're all
>better off this way.  There is _nothing_ that DPMI allows you to do that
>VCPI can't.

Sure there is: It allows me to run programs on my OS/2 box, concurrently with
my Windows and OS/2 programs, with much less worry that the whole thing will
come crashing down around my ears. As it stands now, to run VCPI programs, I
have to use a second computer, or bring down OS/2 (which normally runs all the
time) and boot native DOS with all the trimmings (including DV).

As much as it pains me to admit it (for I argued your side here about a year
ago), DPMI is the wave of the future, and folks that ignore it will get run
over.

>On the other hand DPMI does not allow you to do some things
>that you can do via VCPI.  Some folks think that's a superiority of DPMI,
>since it protects incompetent programers from themselves.

Not so much that; it protects the user from incompetent programmers.

> I am an incompetent
>programmer and I still prefer VCPI.  One of the best ways to learn is to
>have the system hang when you do something really stupid.  I don't like a
>paternalistic environment that won't let me do usefull things because it
>fears that I might be a moron and do it wrong and crash ring 0.  I can be
>a moron and I have crashed ring 0 more than once.  I did learn from the 
>experience though.

That's great, and I agree that that's the best kind of learning experience;
there's only one problem: what about the user who has that kind of thing
inflicted upon him? After all, no testing program is perfect.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
      "Science is all in the public domain, and allows few secrets."
              -- Tom Clancy, _The Sum of All Fears_
From: s0r1282@zeus.tamu.edu (RAVET, STEVEN)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: dpmi vs vcpi
Date: 11 Jan 1993 19:24 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

Not sure if this is the right group, so here goes...
What are the differences and relative merits of DPMI vs VCPI?  I gather qemm
and 386max are vcpi, what is himim.sys?  what about differences from a
programming point of view?  does vcpi leave the processor in v86 mode as a 
normal condition?  well, you get the idea.  is there a ftp'able file somewhere
that explains this?

thanks all, steve

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview,news.answers
From: peter@cad.ee.ntu.edu.tw (Peter R. Tattam)
Subject: Why Application&File manager can't appear
Organization: EE, NTU
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 13:25:45 GMT

Hello  :
    I just installed DV/X on my lab's computers. The first one couldn't show
Application manager and File manager , but the second did it well. They both 
are 16MB RAM 486 produced by different company. I tried several way in 
the first and none of them work. Can anyone give an hint. THANKS  !!!

Chu W.H
EE.NTU Taiwan
e_mail address: r81132@cs.ee.ntu.edu.tw
	
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: bryant@neural.Kodak.COM (Steve Bryant)
Subject: Prodigy with xdv problem
Organization: Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 16:18:04 GMT

If I try to run prodigy from within xdv, the entire system hangs and
I have to do a hard boot. I am running a 386 clone machine with 4 meg
of ram. It appears to have something to do with the mouse. The mouse 
starts to move the arrow and then freezes after the logon screen appears 
in prodigy.

Is this a known conflict or do I just not have my configuration setup
right? Is anyone successfully running Prodigy under xdv?
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: klaus@ced.utah.edu (Klaus Biggers,MEB 3140b,581-6499)
Subject: Trident 8800C Problems
Keywords: It can't be this hard!
Reply-To: klaus@ced.utah.edu
Organization: Center for Engineering Design
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 19:15:31 GMT


Ok.. I've gone through the FAQ.. I've called Tech Support...  I've spent
(wasted??) hours. Can someone out there help me out.  I;ve got a
Trident 8800C VGA Card w512K, Princton Graphics Monitor, 386-40. When I
start Desqview/X, I get the opening screen with the cute watercolor
type screen in the right colors and then, BANG!, all the colors change,
the size of the screen gets screwed up with the opening menu about half
way off of the screen on the right....  in RED instead of blue. I can
only gets things to work halfway in 640x480 with 16 colors.. dismal..
dismal.. Tech support tells me to remove jumper 4 on the VGA
card to disable auto-switching or some such... I have no jumper 4 on
my card! I've run MS-windoze (yuch!) in 1024x768 and it worked great.
This can't be this hard.. What am I overlooking? Can anybody out there
clue me in on what is going on and the remedy.. please... ???

Mucho thanx in advance to anyone that can help...

Tempted to trade it all in on a Sun-
-klaus





---

-klaus                                              klaus@ced.utah.edu

		"To turn is to admit defeat"

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: ryoung@utdallas.edu (Ryu Young)
Subject: DJGPP vs. QDDVX101 header files duplicated?
Organization: Univ. of Texas at Dallas
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:56:35 GMT

While I was installing DJGPP v. 1.09 & QDDVX101,
I found that the following header files were found
in both packages:

	include/pwd.h
		dirent.h
	       /sys/errno.h

Contents are a little bit different.

Do you know which ones do I have to use? Ones from DJGPP or from QDDVX101?

Young
From: garyg@warren.mentorg.com (Gary Gendel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Re: Intel CodeBuilder
Date: 7 Jan 1993 18:52:26 GMT
Organization: Mentor Graphics Corp. -- IC Group
Distribution: world
Reply-To: garyg@warren.mentorg.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: garyg.warren.mentorg.com

In article 151@umr.edu, mcastle@cs.umr.edu (Michael R Castle) writes:
>In article <1993Jan07.004024.16907@qdeck.com> garyrich@qdeck.com (Gary Rich) writes:
>>>		1) Use the GCC compiler.
>>>			This is an issue because the code generated is 50% slower
>>>			than Intel's.  This is unacceptable for this product.
>>
>>Never heard that one before
>
>What kind of app are you writing?  If it does a lot of file i/o or anything
>else that might require a lot of real/protected mode switches, then I imagine
>that other dos-extenders might indeed be better.  As far as pure number
>crunching goes, I would tend to think that almost all the good compilers
>(borland, ms, gcc, watcom, etc) are pretty much neck-and-neck.  Where gcc
>will lose is that there are probably very few machine-specific optimizations
>done.  Gcc is meant to be portable, and so are it's optimizations.  Maybe
>the 386 specific optimizations could be better done, who knows.  Maybe
>we should use the GnuSuperOptimizer and see if that works any better.

Anyone know how to used the GNU SuperOptimizer on GCC generated code?  The input
doesn't seem to be compatible.

The application is an integer CPU limited process.  You hit the nail on the
head with the problem being optimization.  Here's a ramdom sampling of some
stuff I noticed:

	1) The Watcom does the best job of optimization.  In general I found that
		that this code is slightly better than the INTEL code.  The
		exception is in generating a switch jump table, where the INTEL
		code excels.

	2) The GNU compiler optimizer is too general.  Many architecture specific
		optimizations are not performed, which hurt the final results.
		Also, the DJGPP dos extender has had some catastophic failures.
		An uninitialized pointer caused random disk writes.  The drive
		had to be reinitialized and reloaded many times before the problem
		was isolated.  All the other compilers caught this problem as a
		protected mode exception.

	3) Interestingly, on the Sun platform, using cc, lcc (lucid) and gcc,
		all compilers had worse performance on this application when
		the optimization level was increased beyond a certain point.
		This drove me crazy until I found that the optimizers start
		adding additional test and branch instructions to try and
		avoid executing some code.  This works great if the majority
		of the time the branch is taken, but most of the time the
		branch fails and the additional code overhead is incurred.  There
		are some languages that have supported compiler direction in this
		area, like the FORTRAN FREQUENCY statements, but none of these
		compilers do.

	For most of my X work, the GCC program is adequate, however this is not
	the case for this particular application, where throughput is important.

Gary



Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: leisner@wrc.xerox.com ( Marty Leisner)
Subject: NFS with tcp/ip packages
Reply-To: leisner@eso.mc.xerox.com
Organization: Xerox
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 17:03:13 GMT

I have 486 machines and unix platforms( suns).

What I want to accomplish is:
	1) both pcs and suns can access the same files (we have pc/nfs on pcs).
	2) suns can open dos windows on desqview machines
	3) desqview machines can open xterm windows on suns.

Not as a user, but as a networking/X expert, it isn't clear  this is possible (we have a
the desqview/X package, the PC-NFS from Sun, and FTP software...

Is anyone doing this?  Hints?


--
marty
leisner.henr801c@xerox.com  leisner@eso.mc.xerox.com
Member of the League for Programming Freedom
From: liuyu@acf3.nyu.edu (Mr. L)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Qemm 6.02 problems with win 3.1
Date: 10 Jan 93 00:09:02 GMT
Organization: New York University


I'm having trouble starting win3.1 with more than 640k conventional memory.
I'm using qemm 6.02 with hercules card. The base memory is 704k. 
If I exclude the area between 640 and 704k, win 3.1 runs fine. Is there a
way to run win3.1 with 704k base memory?
Thanks in advance.
From: mcastle@cs.umr.edu (Michael R Castle)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Re: Intel CodeBuilder
Date: 7 Jan 93 17:47:46 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla, Rolla, MO

In article <1993Jan07.004024.16907@qdeck.com> garyrich@qdeck.com (Gary Rich) writes:
>>		1) Use the GCC compiler.
>>			This is an issue because the code generated is 50% slower
>>			than Intel's.  This is unacceptable for this product.
>
>Never heard that one before

What kind of app are you writing?  If it does a lot of file i/o or anything
else that might require a lot of real/protected mode switches, then I imagine
that other dos-extenders might indeed be better.  As far as pure number
crunching goes, I would tend to think that almost all the good compilers
(borland, ms, gcc, watcom, etc) are pretty much neck-and-neck.  Where gcc
will lose is that there are probably very few machine-specific optimizations
done.  Gcc is meant to be portable, and so are it's optimizations.  Maybe
the 386 specific optimizations could be better done, who knows.  Maybe
we should use the GnuSuperOptimizer and see if that works any better.

Of course, this isn't really pertinent to this group.  :->

>As of yesterday there is a new (V1.01) of QDPMI.  It is, as before, a full
>implementation of the 0.9 DPMI spec (we could write a 1.0 DPMI, but no 
>software supports it).  It is in the process of being spread
>far and wide.  Anyone that wants a copy in the meanwhile, just send mail to
>support@qdeck.com or d/l from our bbs or the net.

Well, gee, if this isn't a chicken-or-the-egg problem, I don't know what
is!!.  No products (and of course the main one I'm thinking about is
djgpp :-) is going to support DPMI 1.0 until 1.0 servers come out!!!!

>
>The new version may actually make things worse for CodeBuilder though.
>There is a DPMI function that is an extension to the 0.9 spec (but isn't 1.0)
>that Intel and Borland do in mutually incompatible ways.  Guess who won.
uhh.... Intel??   ;->

mrc
-- 
Mike Castle .-=NEXUS=-.  Life is like a clock:  You can work constantly
  mcastle@cs.umr.edu     and be right all the time, or not work at all
S087891@UMRVMA.UMR.EDU   and be right at least twice a day.  -- mrc
    We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan.  -- Watchmen
From: gilf@vms.huji.ac.il (Gil Freund)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: QEMM, DESQview and video problems (revisited)
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:14:22 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel

A while ago I asked about QEMM, DESQview and video problems. I just spend
a long time with the READ.ME file troubleshooting section. The outcome is
that if I use XST=F000, and then X=F000-FFFF FSTC, the video problems seems
do disappear, but then I run QEMM ANALYSIS MAP, an there are no exclusion
ereas.
I think I am missing something here... I would suppose that it means that
I have to exclude the whole F000-FFFF area, but going through the same
procedure with C000 give the same result.

I use a 386DX clone, ATI wonder Plus and a Tensi SVGA monitor.

Any ideas?
--
==========================================================================
Gil Freund                                             GILF@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL
==========================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: garyrich@qdeck.com (Gary Rich)
Subject: Re: QEMM, DESQview and video problems (revisited)
Organization: Quarterdeck Office Systems, Santa Monica CA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:53:19 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.141422.168@vms.huji.ac.il> gilf@vms.huji.ac.il (Gil Freund) writes:
>A while ago I asked about QEMM, DESQview and video problems. I just spend
>a long time with the READ.ME file troubleshooting section. The outcome is
>that if I use XST=F000, and then X=F000-FFFF FSTC, the video problems seems
>do disappear, but then I run QEMM ANALYSIS MAP, an there are no exclusion
>ereas.
>I think I am missing something here... I would suppose that it means that
>I have to exclude the whole F000-FFFF area, but going through the same
>procedure with C000 give the same result.
>



Yes, you are missing something.  Don't feel bad, it contradicts common sense. 
When you look at the analysis map you are not looking for areas that it
is telling you to exclude (remember, you have it excluded _now_)  what
you are looking for are areas in the F segment that say "OK".  This "OK"
means that you are correctly excluding the area.  "OK"s should be converted
to excludes on the QEMM line and F000-FFFF one should be removed.

Also, it's ambigous in the above, make sure you are not running XST=F000
and X=F000-FFFF FSTC all at the same time.  That would make the results
meaningless.



-- 
: Gary Rich : garyrich@qdeck.com
	    :: for tech support- support@qdeck.com
:           : for info        - info@qdeck.com
:
From: Eric.Thockler@aedi.insa-lyon.fr (Eric.Thockler)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Desqview and database
Date: 7 Jan 1993 13:05:04 GMT
Organization: Departement Informatique, INSA Lyon, France.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: aedi.insa-lyon.fr

Hi all !
Do you know what are the DBMS working under Desqview as a database server ?
Thanks....
thockler@aedi.insa-lyon.fr
From: rmbult01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (Robert M. Bultman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Re: text editor for dv/x
Date: 8 Jan 93 03:01:44 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In <KRAUS.93Jan5081205@orchid5.rtsg.mot.com> kraus@rtsg.mot.com (David Kraus) writes:

>Hmmm, just having xedit would be nice in a lot of cases.  For example,
>being able to specify an editor that would have it's own window for
>applications that spawn an editor - some Fido message readers, Paradox PAL
>editing, etc.

>Then again, now that I think about it, it won't buy you much - the
>application is still going to wait until the spawned editor exits before
>continuing, unless it's smart enough to know about DV....

>Although, from what I hear, aXe is MUCH nicer for this sort of thing than
>xedit would ever be...
>--
>Dave Kraus                                         Internet: kraus@rtsg.mot.com
>Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group             FidoNet : 1:115/439.8
>Disclaimer: My employer's views and my views may necessarily differ.
>OBQuote: "Chicago is civilization?" - Me

I had no trouble porting xedit to dvx.  aXe had too much unix junk for me
to handle.  (I have zero experience in unix programming.)  It seems like
it took me about an hour to port xedit.  I have since trashed it.  I just
use the msdos editor that comes with 5.0 in multiple DOS windows for
programming.  (Who needs more than cut and paste, search and replace
anyway? ;->)

-Rob
-- 
Robert M. Bultman                              |
Speed Scientific School                        |
University of Louisville                       |
Internet: rmbult01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu |
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: mcastle@cs.umr.edu (Michael R Castle)
Subject: Re: text editor for dv/x
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 21:36:35 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla, Rolla, MO

In article <4JAN199313151953@zeus.tamu.edu> s0r1282@zeus.tamu.edu (RAVET, STEVEN) writes:
>sorry, meant to put this in the above post.  Is there a simple text editor
>with search/replace, cut/paste, etc for dv/x.  i'm using qedit now, but an
>editor that is actually a dv/x application would be nice.  thanks
>
Hee!  So who want to port emacs (or epoch)!  :->

mrc


-- 
Mike Castle .-=NEXUS=-.  Life is like a clock:  You can work constantly
  mcastle@cs.umr.edu     and be right all the time, or not work at all
S087891@UMRVMA.UMR.EDU   and be right at least twice a day.  -- mrc
    We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan.  -- Watchmen
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: kraus@rtsg.mot.com (David Kraus)
Subject: Re: text editor for dv/x
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Division
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:12:05 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.213635.5529@umr.edu>, mcastle@cs.umr.edu (Michael R Castle) writes:

> In article <4JAN199313151953@zeus.tamu.edu> s0r1282@zeus.tamu.edu (RAVET, STEVEN) writes:
>>sorry, meant to put this in the above post.  Is there a simple text editor
>>with search/replace, cut/paste, etc for dv/x.  i'm using qedit now, but an
>>editor that is actually a dv/x application would be nice.  thanks
>>
> Hee!  So who want to port emacs (or epoch)!  :->

Hmmm, just having xedit would be nice in a lot of cases.  For example,
being able to specify an editor that would have it's own window for
applications that spawn an editor - some Fido message readers, Paradox PAL
editing, etc.

Then again, now that I think about it, it won't buy you much - the
application is still going to wait until the spawned editor exits before
continuing, unless it's smart enough to know about DV....

Although, from what I hear, aXe is MUCH nicer for this sort of thing than
xedit would ever be...
--
Dave Kraus                                         Internet: kraus@rtsg.mot.com
Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group             FidoNet : 1:115/439.8
Disclaimer: My employer's views and my views may necessarily differ.
OBQuote: "Chicago is civilization?" - Me
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: DVX video card query
From: DIXONW@arizvm1.ccit.arizona.edu (Bill Dixon)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:12:21 MST
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona

    Lately many new video cards have come to market, most of which seem
to focus on performance under windoze (see PC Mag 12,1 for a review).
Are benchmarks for these cards (usually listed as "winmarks") relevant
to DVX or are they somehow peculiar to windoze? I imagine this will
depend on available drivers, right? Can anyone offer anything beyond
what is in the FAQ on this latest generation of video cards?
    Also, I understand the memory advantages with 8514/a video under
DVX (or DV). Anyone care to comment on specific cards like the
ATI 8514/a ultra? (Don't know why, but I find video to be terribly
confusing these days.)
- - - -
   William J. Dixon
   Dept. of Political Science          Phone: (602) 621-7600
   University of Arizona              Bitnet: DIXONW AT ARIZVM1
   Tucson, Arizona 85721            Internet: dixonw@arizvm1.ccit.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: burge@qdeck.com (Bill Burge)
Subject: Re: Qemm 6.02 problems with win 3.1
Organization: Quarterdeck Office Systems, Santa Monica CA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:33:03 GMT

In article <C0M332.KAn@cmcl2.nyu.edu> liuyu@acf3.nyu.edu (Mr. L) writes:
>
>I'm having trouble starting win3.1 with more than 640k conventional memory.
>I'm using qemm 6.02 with hercules card. The base memory is 704k. 
>If I exclude the area between 640 and 704k, win 3.1 runs fine. Is there a
>way to run win3.1 with 704k base memory?
>Thanks in advance.

adly the answer to your question is NO.  Windows does not allow for either
backfilling or entending conventional, before running Windows in 386 Enhanced
Mode.  The key would be to run it in Standard Mode.  One presumes that the
reason that you multitask with Windows is due to your use of Windows apps.
These will run faster in Standard Mode and you dos apps will run as well.
If your main thrust id DOS apps you should consider DESQview with a Windows
session INSIDE of DV.

Funny enough, if you had a VGA card you could run VIDRAM inside the Windows
DOS windows before running you apps and extend DOS to 736K.

Windows - I gotta use - don't mean I gotta LIKE IT!

Bill	burge@qdeck.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
From: cperkins@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Carol Perkins)
Subject: AppMan & File Manager: SOLVED
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 05:26:19 GMT

As Bill Burge wrote, the problem was caused by the set temp= statement in my
autoexec.bat.  As soon as I remed it out and rebooted all was well.

Thanks.

SC Perkins
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Compilers for DVX
From: col@n6batws1.itwol.bhp.com.au (Colin Atkinson)
Date: 7 Jan 93 09:39:27 +1000
Distribution: world
Organization: BHP Steel - Slab and Plate Products Division - Port Kembla AUSTRALIA

In Article: 1805 of comp.os.msdos.desqview Dave Kraus writes

 

>		1) Use the GCC compiler.
>			This is an issue because the code generated is 50% slower
>			than Intel's.  This is unacceptable for this product.
>
>		2) Use the Watcom compiler.
>			This compiler has a 2-4x degradation in speed when the VM
>			option of the extender is used.  It does fly, however,
>			if the NOVM switch is used.  Also the 16M limit for the
>			extender is a problem.  This sucker needs all the memory
>			and CPU that it can get.  I don't have the time or money
>			to play around with other extenders.  In addition, it
>			would require users to purchase the extender.

I have been using the GCC compilers and find it very slow both at compiling and executing the compiled code. I have both the Borland C++ and the Microsoft C7.0 compilers (which are currently only used as very expensive paperweight) but am unsure on how to use the DVX libs (which are in '.a' format). Is this possible or do the libraries have to be recompiled and re libraryised (probably not a real word). If this is th case, where can I get the sources.
Thanks in advance





-- 
   /\/\     :  Colin Atkinson - Electrical / Software Engineer  
  / / /\    :  Contracted to Engineering Technology Department
 / / /  \   :  BHP Steel - Slab and Plate Products Division
/ / / /\ \  :  P.O. Box 1854 Wollongong NSW 2500 AUSTRALIA
\ \/ / / /  :  Phone    +61-42-75-3840
 \  / / /   :  Fax      +61-42-75-7897 
  \/\/\/    :  E-mail   col@n6batws1.itwol.bhp.com.au

Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview