DOS ain't dead

This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - but not on EDR-DOS (Announce)

posted by DOS386, 05.04.2009, 04:21

> > > you can't write any large program
> > This one isn't ...
> Isn't what?

Large maybe ?

> What's your reason not to?

Risk.

> > > Comment your files better.
> > See UI21DEB
> See what? See bad comments in UI21DEB

I'm waiting for good comments in RxDOS source

> Because the owner value is 0008h which is reserved for system blocks. And
> because MS-DOS system blocks only used the first 2 letters as actual name

I see ...

> Give your MCB an owner value of the associated memory block

Then it would unhog of course.

> use the IBM Interrupt Sharing Protocol (IISP) when hooking

> want to uninstall their interrupt handlers. IISP is a great solution to
> the "can't uninstall because of other TSR" problem

Interesting, if such a thing existed at all: UTFG UTFI

> Maybe because you're a real DOS user and think Int2F was only added in
> later MS-DOS versions so that it "isn't quite DOS" enough?

Because RBIL has much bloat on INT $2F and most of the stuff is either unreproductable, useless, or evil (all the "GetWindaubeVersion", "WindaubeOldApp", ... stuff).

BTW, I fixed most of the BUG's in UI21DEB, now it can also uninstall, and also it will refuse to uninstall if it is not safe to do

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

Complete thread:

• This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - DOS386, 22.03.2009, 04:56 (Announce)
  • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - Laaca, 22.03.2009, 09:11
  • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - ecm, 22.03.2009, 11:36
  • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - mr, 22.03.2009, 20:05
    • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - ecm, 22.03.2009, 21:57
      • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - mr, 25.03.2009, 19:01
        • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - ecm, 25.03.2009, 19:10
          • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - mr, 25.03.2009, 20:09
            • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - ecm, 26.03.2009, 20:43
              • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - Khusraw, 27.03.2009, 08:29
                • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - RayeR, 28.03.2009, 03:17
        • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - Khusraw, 25.03.2009, 22:08
  • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - rr, 22.03.2009, 21:53
  • Impossible to beat? This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - Japheth, 27.03.2009, 09:23
    • Impossible to beat? This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - ecm, 27.03.2009, 15:12
    • Impossible to beat? This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - Rugxulo, 27.03.2009, 17:12
    • This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - but not on EDR-DOS - DOS386, 31.03.2009, 04:03
      • Yes - Japheth, 31.03.2009, 10:53
      • This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - but not on EDR-DOS - ecm, 31.03.2009, 23:10
        • This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - but not on EDR-DOS - DOS386, 05.04.2009, 04:21
          • This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - but not on EDR-DOS - ecm, 05.04.2009, 09:27
            • This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - but not on EDR-DOS - DOS386, 07.04.2009, 05:05
              • This version needs 0/0/0/0 Bytes - but not on EDR-DOS - ecm, 07.04.2009, 13:34
  • This TSR is impossible to beat !!! 116/48/32/0 Bytes ARF pr - Arjay, 11.12.2009, 12:21