Peter_Van_Epp@cc.sfu.ca (07/12/89)
I have a couple of answers and a question, first the asnwers:
1) With the 1.3 version of xt_wini.c in order to run on the second drive
you need to change define MAX_DRIVES from 1 to 2 to use the second
drive (that is not the problem for the person asking as he is using
at_wini.c, we have been talking by E-mail). If anyone has anything to
suggest, it is IBTALL01@CZHETH1I on Bitnet who wants to know.
2) To the person asking about expanded memory, article 420@uvicctr.uucp
on the FTP archive at bugs.nosc.mil works for the Intel aboveboard.
I had to modify it some to get it to work on a Zuckerboard EMS card
but it works fine there too. If you are running 1.3, ignore all the
changes they are already done, just replace ems_xfer() in klib88.s
with the one from the archive and all should be well (if you create
a root disk bigger than 255K it will put it in what it thinks is
extended memory but in this case is expanded memory, assuming I have
those the right way around). If it doesn't work with your board you
may have to use debug to disassemble / trace through your EMS driver
to get the addresses for your board.
Now for the question: on Bitnet should we be sending replies to the
list to info-minix@udel.edu or minix-l@ndsuvm1. I dumped the message
headers from a message from Minix-l and the reply-to field is
info-minix@udel.edu (where this message is going!) am I correct in
suspecting that postings to Minix-l@ndsuvm1 go to the Bitnet sites
but don't get through the gateway? If this is so, I wonder if that
is what happened to Bruce Even's protected mode changes, I saw them
come by on Bitnet but they don't seem to have made it into bugs.nosc.mil's
archive. Maybe someone who has a copy could arrange to get them put on
bugs (assuming of course that bugs is willing to accpt them!)?
Peter Van Epp / userpepp@sfu from Bitnet, EARN or Netnorth
or Peter_Van_Epp@cc.sfu.ca