kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu (Karl Buck) (11/13/90)
We are having trouble getting MSC 6.0 to recognize the include files on a network drive. The environment variables all seem to be set up right and the proper permissions are on the directories and files. Since I'm sure this is a simple problem I'd apprectiate any answers by Email. Thanks. -- 731 Moro popeye@matt.ksu.ksu.edu kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu Manhattan, KS 66502 popeye@ksuvm.ksu.edu kxb@einstein.mpccl.ksu.edu (913)537-3666 kxb@phobos.cis.ksu.edu
west@turing.toronto.edu (Tom West) (11/13/90)
In article <1990Nov12.203707.9669@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu> kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu (Karl Buck) writes: >We are having trouble getting MSC 6.0 to recognize the include files on a >network drive. The environment variables all seem to be set up right and the >proper permissions are on the directories and files. Since I'm sure this >is a simple problem I'd apprectiate any answers by Email. Thanks. Good luck, MSC 6.0 requires every spare bit that you can round up. Having PC-NFS up will eat way more memory than MSC 6.0 is willing to accept. We eventually had to give up the idea of using our SUNs to store source to our program, a real pain. And no, MSC 6.0 does *not* use extended memory when compiling, so your extra 2 meg sit by idle while it complains about noit enough memory. And yes, MSC 6.0 is filled with bugs. And yes, the update doesn't come with a change history, so it is next to useless unless you have the time to go through each of the code generation bugs you've found by yourself *since MS doesn't give out bug lists* and check the assembler output yourself. And yes, MS does charge an arm and a leg for such a compiler. On the other hand, CV 3.0 is pretty nifty, aside from the fact that you can't feed your programs Ctrl-Breaks. (CV steals them all.) However, CV DOES use the extended memory you might have (yeah!). Tom West