[comp.os.msdos.desqview] Problems right off the bat

Dave_Kirsch@mindlink.bc.ca (Dave Kirsch) (05/23/91)

> stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu writes:
> 
> 1. MANIFEST reports DOS 4.00 although DOS's VER reports 4.01 (it IS 4.01).

This is a problem with DOS 4.01.  When Microsoft fixed DOS and changed the
version number to 4.01, they only changed what COMMAND.COM says when you type
VER.  The DOS internal function that programs use to get the DOS version number
returns it as 4.00.  It's a small oversight of Microsoft.

> 
> 2. BUFFER won't run, saying it needs DOS 2 or 3.

BUFFER doesn't work with DOS 4.01, and it doesn't need to.  With DOS 4.01, you
can tell DOS to put buffers in EMS (freeing up low memory space).  This done by
specifing "BUFFERS=30 /X" in your CONFIG.SYS file.  You'll get a better savings
than with QEMM's BUFFER command anyway.

> 
> 3. OPTIMIZE won't put a LOADHI command for Sidekick in my autoexec.  It
>    made LOADHI commands for my other TSR's but not SK.  I can of course
>    change the autoexec file myself, but why would OPTIMIZE choke on SK?

I'm assuming you are talking about SideKick 1.56b.  SK is a large TSR program
and you probably don't have enough high ram to stick it up there.  You need
like a 96K continous block of high ram to load it.  Besides, since SideKick is
so large a TSR, it would eat up most of your high ram and not leave much for
other programs to load.  Run SideKick in its own DV window (I do).
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
/// Dave 'Zoid' Kirsch     | "The Art Of Noise refuse to blame
                           | themselves." - AoN, WHO'S AFRAID OF...?
Voice:  (604) 585-8844     | "HEALTH WARNING:  This record could be
UUCP:  a563@mindlink.bc.ca | hazardous to the health of cloth-eared
                           | nincompoops.  If you suffer from this
                           | condition, consult your Doctor
Vancouver, British Columbia| immediately." - Mike Oldfield, AMAROK.

stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) (05/24/91)

I just got DV386 and have encountered these problems with it and the 
programs bundled with it:

1. MANIFEST reports DOS 4.00 although DOS's VER reports 4.01 (it IS 4.01).

2. BUFFER won't run, saying it needs DOS 2 or 3.

3. OPTIMIZE won't put a LOADHI command for Sidekick in my autoexec.  It
   made LOADHI commands for my other TSR's but not SK.  I can of course
   change the autoexec file myself, but why would OPTIMIZE choke on SK?

Que pasa?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Glenn Stone                                      BITNET: stone@cunixc
  Columbia University            INTERNET: stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

dhosek@euler.claremont.edu (Don Hosek) (05/24/91)

In article <1991May23.203923.4683@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>, stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) writes:
> I just got DV386 and have encountered these problems with it and the 
> programs bundled with it:
 
> 1. MANIFEST reports DOS 4.00 although DOS's VER reports 4.01 (it IS 4.01).

Actually it _is_ 4.00. 4.01 is not really an official version
number although ver and the packaging have it anyway.
 
> 2. BUFFER won't run, saying it needs DOS 2 or 3.

rtfm. rtfERROR MESSAGE.
 
> 3. OPTIMIZE won't put a LOADHI command for Sidekick in my autoexec.  It
>    made LOADHI commands for my other TSR's but not SK.  I can of course
>    change the autoexec file myself, but why would OPTIMIZE choke on SK?

Not enough memory left to load it hight perhaps? Take a look at
first meg/programs in MFT and compare the size of SIDEKICK to the
open holes over 640K.

-dh

--
Don Hosek                  
dhosek@ymir.claremont.edu  
Quixote Digital Typography 
714-625-0147               

feg@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (forrest.e.gehrke) (05/24/91)

In article <1991May23.203923.4683@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) writes:
>I just got DV386 and have encountered these problems with it and the 
>programs bundled with it:
>
>1. MANIFEST reports DOS 4.00 although DOS's VER reports 4.01 (it IS 4.01).
>

Because when MFT looks at the boot record it finds 4.00.  MS never
changed it to 4.01.

>2. BUFFER won't run, saying it needs DOS 2 or 3.
>

You didn't read the manual, old boy.  For msdos 4.+ you use
buffers /x to get QEMM to move them into expanded memory.

>3. OPTIMIZE won't put a LOADHI command for Sidekick in my autoexec.  It
>   made LOADHI commands for my other TSR's but not SK.  I can of course
>   change the autoexec file myself, but why would OPTIMIZE choke on SK?
>
Probably because SK is too big to move.  Perhaps if you name it first
in your list of TSR's it will be loaded high, but then some other 
TSR's won't make it.  You may also have to fiddle a bit to create 
the largest possible space for SK to be moved up.  Look the manual 
over to see how this can be done. OPTIMIZE isn't always smart enough 
to handle this kind of problem.  QEMM always wants to place the page 
frame at E000.  You may have to force this elsewhere; I had to force 
it to start at CC00.

Another thing to consider is that more space is needed to load a
TSR than its eventual size (the manual explains this, too).


Forrest Gehrke feg\@dodger.att.com

geoffw@xenitec.on.ca (Geoffrey Welsh) (05/27/91)

In article <1991May23.203923.4683@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) writes:
>I just got DV386 and have encountered these problems with it and the 
>programs bundled with it:
>
>1. MANIFEST reports DOS 4.00 although DOS's VER reports 4.01 (it IS 4.01).

   That sounds strange (Manifest *should* be able to determine DOS
version nuumber accurately), but I doubt that it has any reall effect.

>2. BUFFER won't run, saying it needs DOS 2 or 3.

   DOS 4.0x (and 5.0) use a different structure for disk buffers,
so the Quarterdeck program to increase buffers is incompatible.
You may wish to use the DOS 4.0x BUFFERS parameter that puts the
buffers into expanded (or was it extended?) memory.

   This *should* be documented in the QEMM386 or DV386 manual.

>3. OPTIMIZE won't put a LOADHI command for Sidekick in my autoexec.  It
>   made LOADHI commands for my other TSR's but not SK.  I can of course
>   change the autoexec file myself, but why would OPTIMIZE choke on SK?

   I never trusted OPTIMIZE anyway, but you can't fault it for
missing one opportunity.  Perhaps it determined that it was more
memory-efficient to put other things into high memory and leave
SK low (perhaps there isn't enough room left in high memory?)

   Geoff

Geoffrey.Welsh@sunbrk.FidoNet.Org (Geoffrey Welsh) (05/28/91)

In article <1991May23.203923.4683@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) writes:
>I just got DV386 and have encountered these problems with it and the 
>programs bundled with it:
>
>1. MANIFEST reports DOS 4.00 although DOS's VER reports 4.01 (it IS 4.01).

   That sounds strange (Manifest *should* be able to determine DOS
version nuumber accurately), but I doubt that it has any reall effect.

>2. BUFFER won't run, saying it needs DOS 2 or 3.

   DOS 4.0x (and 5.0) use a different structure for disk buffers,
so the Quarterdeck program to increase buffers is incompatible.
You may wish to use the DOS 4.0x BUFFERS parameter that puts the
buffers into expanded (or was it extended?) memory.

   This *should* be documented in the QEMM386 or DV386 manual.

>3. OPTIMIZE won't put a LOADHI command for Sidekick in my autoexec.  It
>   made LOADHI commands for my other TSR's but not SK.  I can of course
>   change the autoexec file myself, but why would OPTIMIZE choke on SK?

   I never trusted OPTIMIZE anyway, but you can't fault it for
missing one opportunity.  Perhaps it determined that it was more
memory-efficient to put other things into high memory and leave
SK low (perhaps there isn't enough room left in high memory?)

   Geoff

 * Origin: Seaeast - Fidonet<->Usenet Gateway - sunbrk (1:343/15.0)

gilf@VMS.HUJI.AC.IL (GIL FREUND) (05/31/91)

In article <675432063.11@sunbrk.FidoNet>, Geoffrey.Welsh@sunbrk.FidoNet.Org (Geoffrey Welsh) writes...
> 
>>3. OPTIMIZE won't put a LOADHI command for Sidekick in my autoexec.  It
>>   made LOADHI commands for my other TSR's but not SK.  I can of course
>>   change the autoexec file myself, but why would OPTIMIZE choke on SK?
> 
>   I never trusted OPTIMIZE anyway, but you can't fault it for
>missing one opportunity.  Perhaps it determined that it was more
>memory-efficient to put other things into high memory and leave
>SK low (perhaps there isn't enough room left in high memory?)
> 
Some (actually most) TSR programs use far mor memory for loading then they
catually use for executing. The best wey to check it would be to start the 
program with loadhi and the /gs (get size) parameter. Example: 
LOADHI /GS SK
The program will then start, and after the execution ends loadhi will report
how much memory the program consumes on execusion, and how much is needs
to remain as a TSR. You will find that some TSR that need only a few k's 
to oparate, need more then 50K to start.
If you'll check each and every TSR and device driver, you are likely to 
find out that some device drivers and TSR are better placed in the begining
of the CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT as they consume more RAM on execusion, 
yet leave enough high memory for other devices drivers and TSR. Doing 
you own optimizine might give you far more free memory, as OPTIMIZE itself
will not alter the CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files beyong adding the 
LOADHI statments.
If you use DESQview, another use for the GS parameter is to see how much
memory a program needs (for the DVP file). Start the program with the 
LOADHI /GS program, and use it as you normally would. When you'll exit is
LOADHI will report the maximum memory used. You can then use that number
in the DVP file.

Gil