From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Feb 19 18:08:22 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA06564 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 18:08:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.50]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA06532 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 18:08:16 -0800 (PST) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id KAA13304; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:37:34 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199702191737.KAA13304@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Sun Workshop compiler vs. GCC? To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:37:34 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, jamie@inna.net, toneil@visigenic.com, jfieber@indiana.edu, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199702190220.TAA20367@rocky.mt.sri.com> from "Nate Williams" at Feb 18, 97 07:20:53 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > > You're wrong Terry. The win31 -> win95 upgrade copies your autoexec and > > > config files to .dos, and rems some of the old drivers (like msdex) out, > > > but overall it will use the 16bit dos drivers happily. > > > > Not according to King and Schulman... > > Terry, watch me, and repeat this on your keyboard. > > 'I was wrong, you are correct.' > > Don't trust to justify yourself and change the subject. It only makes > you look silly and petty. Admit you are wrong. > > I looked through the databases and couldn't find any articles where you > admitted you were wrong, so I want to see it once. You can't *use* what you don't *load*. I agree that it renames the files... I said it before you did, in fact: ] Loading Win95 on a system will rename the "config.sys" and "autoexec.bat" ] to "config.dos" and "autoexec.dos" so that they will not be run by default. YES, the drivers it doesn't like are REM'ed out in this process. NO, Windows95 does not run autoexec.dos or load from config.dos. > ps. I also know you are wrong because the same thing happened when I > upgraded to Win95 on my box. I am typing this from a telnet running from a Windows95 box. I am an MSDN level II developer. I have done significant amounts of ring 0 programming, including porting the Heidemann VFS framework to Windows95 and correcting the problems in it there which you won't let me correct in FreeBSD. I know what the hell I am talking about. Have you even read the Schulman book, where it talks about incrementally going from "DOS 7.0" to "Windows95", a VXD at a time? The boot process and dependencies are described in detail. I can not speak for your experiences, except to say that they are quite bizarre, and not in line with my own. Given that I had access to the Windows95 Alpha and have been installing the thing over and over (I did work on FS drivers -- duh) since around December of 1994, I *probably* have installed it more than you have. And I'm telling you that your experiences are not my experiences, and I can not explain how you arrived at yours. Here are all the files references by io.sys in the boot state of Win95; repeititions not differeing by drive letter are used during "safe mode" booting, which is implemented in io.sys.: C:\SYSTEM.DAT \CONFIG.SYS A:\COUNTRY.SYS \HIMEM.SYS \ASPI2DOS.SYS \ASPI2HLP.SYS \DBLBUFF.SYS \IFSHLP.SYS C:\MSDOSSYS.STS IO.SYS MSDOS.SYS C:\MSDOS.SYS CONFIG.SYS WINBOOT.SYS MBRINT13.SYS QEMM386.SYS DBLS.BIN \LOGO.SYS C:\IO.SYS C:\WINBOOT.SYS \COUNTRY.SYS \AUTOEXEC.BAT AUTOEXEC.BAT *NOTICE* the *lack* of references to "config.dos" and "autoexec.dos". Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.