From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games
Subject: Re: PKZIP 2.04c (buggy)
Date: 22 Jan 93 13:23:47 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <1993Jan19.164828.139062@zeus.calpoly.edu> jemenake@zeus.calpoly.edu (Joe Emenaker) writes:
>Dave Perrussel <DBP103@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>scott@opl.com (Scott Evernden) says:
>>
>>>In article <C0s6HB.LtB@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>  
>>>djtooley@napier.uwaterloo.c
>>>(Doug Tooley) writes:
>>
>>Full of bugs is right. I was using Zip204 under windows under the
>>DOS prompt and the ENTIRE HARD DISK CRASHED!!! My advice is that
>>DO NOT USE PKZip 2.04C *ESPECIALLY* UNDER WINDOWS!!!!! Thank God
>>for backups!!! :)

I do not think that Zip was responsible for the hard disk crash,
this may be coincidence.  

>I think you're missing something here. The only problems I've seen
>anybody speak of when talking about PKZip 2.04c is when they use it in a
>Windows DOS box. And you guys just assume it's PKZip's fault.
>
>Likewise, you've got this Windows DOS box... something that is not
>world-renowned for robustness or stability or even decent multi-tasking
>(the DOS box... I'm referring to... not Windows in general). Then, you
>get this compressor that, oh heaven forbid, actually tries to use all
>available system resources in order to do its job faster, better,
>whatever. So, you run PKZip in the DOS box and Windows can't hang and
>throws a hissy-fit and fries your FAT and directories.... and it's
>PKZip's fault?

Yes.  Especially when previous versions did not have problems
in this area.  They have introduced new, and severe, flaws without
giving anyone any warnings that this may occur.

btw: the -) flag may fix many of these problems, I believe that
the major problem is that pkzip now tries to use DPMI if it is
available.  Windows is (I believe) a DPMI server, but DPMI is not
made available to the DOS box -- yet the query issued to see if
DPMI is available is still answered in the affirmative.  I may
have the details wrong, but I'm pretty sure this is something
close to the actual problem.

>I don't know about you guys... but I steer VERY clear or running
>anything significant in a Windows DOS box. You're asking for trouble. I
>use the DOS box to do directories, copy files, delete files, etc. I
>don't use anything that uses a COM port or graphics or tries to grab any
>memory not in the lower 640k. And lo-and-behold, I haven't had my hard
>disk crash since... I can't even remember!

You are also missing a lot.  Why avoid running a COM port?  Why avoid
programs that use graphics (note that I have never been able to GET
this particular feature of Win31 to work, but if you CAN get it to
work, why avoid it?)  The windows box is not as fragile as you are
making it out to be.  otoh, it is still not the best environment 
to work with.  I've had bunches of problems w/ it myself, but you
seem positively paranoid about it.

>It's like the Saturday Night Live commercial about Happy Fun Ball...
>where, in the disclaimer, they say "Please do not taunt Happy Fun Ball".
>
>Please Do NOT Taunt Happy Fun Windows.... or Happy Fun Windows DOS Box.

		-Richard Hartman

--------------------------------------------------------------
"Happy happy, Joy joy"			-Ren & Stimpy