NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) (07/11/89)
I have VPIX 1.1.0 running under a 2.3.1 kernel and have noted a problem with
what appears to be the buffering of keystrokes. The problem is reproducible
when I run the Shareware editor QEDIT under VPIX. Occassionaly when I press
a key the application (editor) does not appear to receive the keystroke until
I press the next key. As you can imagine this becomes somewhat frustrating
after a period of time.
I have heard this problem mentioned on the net before but as of yet have heard
no verification of the problem or a possible workaround. Does anybody on the
net know what is going on?
I am running with an ALR 386/220 with 2 meg of memory very lightly loaded, i.e.
nothing else except a couple of getty's, cron, update and the swapper running.
I know that 2 meg of memory is marginal for VPIX, will the problem ameliorate
itself with more memory? Either e-mail or a posting to the net would be
satisfactory. Thanks in advance for any possible information.
As always,
G.W. Wettstein
NU013809@NDSUVM1debra@alice.UUCP (Paul De Bra) (07/13/89)
In article <2502NU013809@NDSUVM1> NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) writes: }I have VPIX 1.1.0 running under a 2.3.1 kernel and have noted a problem with }what appears to be the buffering of keystrokes. The problem is reproducible }when I run the Shareware editor QEDIT under VPIX. Occassionaly when I press }a key the application (editor) does not appear to receive the keystroke until }I press the next key. As you can imagine this becomes somewhat frustrating }after a period of time. }... Must be a VP/IX problem as I have seen the same problem with Simultask (this is vp/ix for AT&T Unix) and AT&T Sys Vr3.2.1 on a 4 Meg system with games like police-quest. Paul. -- ------------------------------------------------------ |debra@research.att.com | uunet!research!debra | ------------------------------------------------------
jbayer@ispi.UUCP (Jonathan Bayer) (07/13/89)
NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein) writes: }I have VPIX 1.1.0 running under a 2.3.1 kernel and have noted a problem with }what appears to be the buffering of keystrokes. The problem is reproducible }when I run the Shareware editor QEDIT under VPIX. Occassionaly when I press }a key the application (editor) does not appear to receive the keystroke until }I press the next key. As you can imagine this becomes somewhat frustrating }after a period of time. I just upgraded to 2.3.2, and the problem seems to be reduced. The upgrade is free, you just have to install it. JB -- Jonathan Bayer Beware: The light at the end of the Intelligent Software Products, Inc. tunnel may be an oncoming dragon 500 Oakwood Ave. ...uunet!ispi!root Roselle Park, NJ 07204 (201) 245-5922 jbayer@ispi.UUCP
bote@csense.UUCP (John Boteler) (07/17/89)
From article <2502NU013809@NDSUVM1>, by NU013809@NDSUVM1.BITNET (Greg Wettstein): > I have VPIX 1.1.0 running under a 2.3.1 kernel and have noted a problem with > what appears to be the buffering of keystrokes. The problem is reproducible > when I run the Shareware editor QEDIT under VPIX. Occassionaly when I press > a key the application (editor) does not appear to receive the keystroke until > I press the next key. As you can imagine this becomes somewhat frustrating > after a period of time. The workaround is to abandon using VP/ix. VP/ix does the best it can under the constraints of an 'operating system' which based its modus operandi on the assumption that all hardware was at its disposal all the time. Xenix' formidable task is to share that hardware and time slice the software operations in such a manner as to prevent the DOS task from consuming all the resources of the system. I don't know the technical details of how it is done, but the keyboard lag you notice is commonplace. I have grown to live with it, knowing that I am getting something done in DOS without having to reboot. That alone is time consuming, without mentioning the loss of Xenix services while running DOS as the sole task on the machine. I understand that these symptoms are either gone or much less severe on a serial VP/ix job. Test that with a suitable DOS application. -- Bote uunet!cyclops!csense!bote {mimsy,sundc}!{prometheus,hqda-ai}!media!cyclops!csense!bote