From owner-freebsd-current Sun Mar 16 11:33:58 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA15535 for current-outgoing; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 11:33:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from kithrup.com (kithrup.com [205.179.156.40]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA15529 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 11:33:54 -0800 (PST) Received: (from sef@localhost) by kithrup.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id LAA09028; Sun, 16 Mar 1997 11:33:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Mar 1997 11:33:52 -0800 From: Sean Eric Fagan Message-Id: <199703161933.LAA09028@kithrup.com> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Gotcha in moving to post 4.4 lite2 merge ``world''. Newsgroups: kithrup.freebsd.current In-Reply-To: <19970316091923.LT11860.kithrup.freebsd.current@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <199703160024.QAA13864@kithrup.com>; from Sean Eric Fagan on Mar 15, 1997 16:24:41 -0800 Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In article <19970316091923.LT11860.kithrup.freebsd.current@uriah.heep.sax.de> you write: >> We do have a working (more or less) doscmd. >Well, that's good news. Why don't we integrate them into the tree? >3.0 is highly experimental these days, so it's the right time to add >yet another experimental feature. We haven't checked it in for several reasons: 1. I don't run -current ;). I just, in fact, upgraded to 2.2--GAMMA in early February. 2. -current is still suffering from the Lite/2 integration, and msmith, jlemon, and I decided we would wait for it to settle down before we started merging with -current. (Because we didn't want to deal with the problems of having one experimental patch on top of an unstable system.) 3. As jlemon points out himself, it can lock up the system. (Not completely lock up, but only interrupt-driven services run. And, sadly, X is not interrupt driven. :() We're not sure what's going on here; my suspicion is an infinite loop in the kernel, doscmd getting a cli passed through, and/or we're somehow bypassing the normal code path that allows the kernel to switch processes. >Well really, with so many people asking for it, >get it into the tree, and let others test it. The problem is, as I pointed out on -emulation, that strict DOS emulation doesn't buy you a whole lot. And that's all doscmd does. DOSEMU might provide more (it has support for DPMI, and can even run Windows 3.1 in non-extended [80186] mode), but I don't know how much. A working Wabi, WINE, or SoftWindows is probably more valuble to users these days. Sean.