Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the board
Thread view  Mix view  Order
w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
15.02.2011, 02:58
 

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH (Users)

When I load DOSLFN under MSD710, no matter what I do
it loads LOW using something like 12k.

Does anyone know or have an idea how to load this driver high.

I am using JEMMEX.

Steve Broshears ...

Ninho(R)

E-mail

15.02.2011, 11:50
(edited by Ninho, 15.02.2011, 12:58)

@ w3a537

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

Hi! Next time, will you notice that you posted to the "announce" section which is not quite appropriate. Replying here since I can't relocate the thread, assuming only RR could do the right thing...

> When I load DOSLFN under MSD710, no matter what I do
> it loads LOW using something like 12k.

Strange indeed. I have not had a problem loading it into "upper" memory, using either loadhigh/lh or installhigh=DOSLFN.COM.

You should heed the warnings and load DEVICE=LOWDMA.SYS (load it LOW) especially if using diskettes - but I suppose you knew that, and it has no incidence on your actual question here.

> Does anyone know or have an idea how to load this driver high.
> I am using JEMMEX.

I'm not using JEMMX, but whatever your UMB provider should not matter.
Please give us more information (from your config.sys/ autoexec.bat)

--
Ninho

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
15.02.2011, 22:16

@ Ninho

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

My config.sys and autoexec.bat are MUCH too long
to simply post them. Is there a way to attach them?

Or email them somehow possibly so everyone interested
can see them.

I use the IO.SYS COMMAND.COM from MSD710 and JEMMEX.
And I just tested again and it went LOW.

And JEMMEX with NOEMS gives me so much UMB memory
that there is still 44k available after loading as
much as possible HIGH.

DOSLFN is version 0.32c.

Steve Broshears ...

Ninho(R)

E-mail

15.02.2011, 22:40

@ w3a537

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

> My config.sys and autoexec.bat are MUCH too long
> to simply post them. Is there a way to attach them?

Can't you post only the relevant lines ? As for attachments onto this board, someone else will have to chime in, I don't know if (and how) it's possible.

> Or email them somehow possibly so everyone interested
> can see them.

Email /everyone/ ? Better find a place where you could post it, don't you have "personal pages" of some sort with your ISP for instance ?

In any case if I had a problem similar to yours, and if my configuration files were "MUCH" too long, I would start by fleshing them out for diagnostic purposes. Try removing irrelevant drivers/ TSRs leaving only your memory manager and then try to LOADHIGH DOSLFN from the command line. If the problem doesn't occur, add CONFIG lines one by one and note what happens. OTOH ff the problem is still occurring AFTER fleshing out the CONFIG, then at least you may be able to post the resulting /shortened/ config file(s) here !

> I use the IO.SYS COMMAND.COM from MSD710 and JEMMEX.
> And I just tested again and it went LOW.

Why don't you try replacing JEMMX by HIMEM.SYS+EMM386 for a test, although a priori I wouldn't incriminate JEMMEX. Or it could be you're not giving the correct parameters to JEMMX - wild guess since you didn't show us anything. Japheth will tell you if there is any problem in this respect.

> And JEMMEX with NOEMS gives me so much UMB memory
> that there is still 44k available after loading as
> much as possible HIGH.

> DOSLFN is version 0.32c.

Please try some of the above suggestions, and call back when you've got something to display...

---
Ninho

Rugxulo(R)

Homepage

Usono,
15.02.2011, 22:50

@ Ninho

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

> Email /everyone/ ? Better find a place where you could post it, don't you
> have "personal pages" of some sort with your ISP for instance ?

Try here: http://pastebin.com/

> > DOSLFN is version 0.32c.

Isn't 0.32c old? (Was that Haftmann's last? Is it more stable? [doubt it])

Why not try 0.40e? http://adoxa.110mb.com/doslfn/index.html

cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
15.02.2011, 23:46

@ w3a537

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

> And JEMMEX with NOEMS gives me so much UMB memory
> that there is still 44k available after loading as
> much as possible HIGH.

How do you determine this? Please insure the 44 KiB are available in chunks large enough to load DOSLFN into. If the space available in UMBs is too fragmented, it can't fit anywhere.

---
l

swf(R)

E-mail

Canada,
16.02.2011, 14:51

@ cm

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

> > And JEMMEX with NOEMS gives me so much UMB memory
> > that there is still 44k available after loading as
> > much as possible HIGH.
>
> How do you determine this? Please insure the 44 KiB are available in chunks
> large enough to load DOSLFN into. If the space available in UMBs is too
> fragmented, it can't fit anywhere.
Try Moving DOSLFN's position in the CONFIG.SYS load order to an earlier position. It may be that the initalization size of DOSLFN is larger than the largest available upper memory block therefor DOSLFN is forced to load low. Try loading the drivers and TSR's that have the smallest footprint last. This may requirer mutiple reboots untill you get it right. The quick way to test this is if you "comment out" anything that is currently loading befor DOSLFN other than JEMM that create the UMB's and see if DOSLFN will then load. If it does then you can play around with the load order untill you get the optimal setup. Stephen

Rugxulo(R)

Homepage

Usono,
16.02.2011, 18:04

@ swf

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

> Try Moving DOSLFN's position in the CONFIG.SYS load order to an earlier
> position. It may be that the initalization size of DOSLFN is larger than
> the largest available upper memory block therefor DOSLFN is forced to load
> low. Try loading the drivers and TSR's that have the smallest footprint
> last. This may requirer mutiple reboots untill you get it right. The quick
> way to test this is if you "comment out" anything that is currently loading
> befor DOSLFN other than JEMM that create the UMB's and see if DOSLFN will
> then load. If it does then you can play around with the load order untill
> you get the optimal setup. Stephen

Now you got me thinking: maybe "DOS=HIGH,UMB" eats up too much? Also, I forget exactly, never tested, but MS-DOS vs. DR-DOS had a different way of doing things, one loaded everything in order as listed, the other not. Perhaps somebody here knows more specifics about that.

Ninho(R)

E-mail

16.02.2011, 19:18

@ Rugxulo

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

> Now you got me thinking: maybe "DOS=HIGH,UMB" eats up too much?

The line by itself "eats up" nothing at all - it just sets internal flags ;=)

> forget exactly, never tested, but MS-DOS vs. DR-DOS had a different way of
> doing things, one loaded everything in order as listed, the other not.
> Perhaps somebody here knows more specifics about that.

MSDOS loads all DEVICE=drivers before any INSTALL=TSR. Maybe this is what you have in mind ?

As for the original poster, he has received several good pieces of advice to start with, I won't speculate any more until he chimes back in with fresh information; it's his move, not ours IMHO.

--
Ninho

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
17.02.2011, 02:14

@ Ninho

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

The relevant line is "installhigh = \doslfnm.com"

As for jemmex I don't want to replace it, it is tooo good.

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
17.02.2011, 02:15

@ Rugxulo

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

Yes it was old. I replaced it with .34.
Same problem.

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
17.02.2011, 02:17

@ cm

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

How do I determine this?

I have 3 different memory display programs.
Trust me.

The 44k in continous.

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
17.02.2011, 02:28

@ swf

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

It didn't help.

I have two analsys programs to check this.

MAXMEM reports:

DOS memory: 632896 starting, 632896 minfree, 0 maximum used.
doslfnm.com never adjusted its size.
XMS memory: 65535K starting, 65535K minfree, oK maximum used.

MINMEM reports:

DOSLFNM.COM 20192
Env size: 448

No problems here

Steve ...

cm(R)

Homepage E-mail

Düsseldorf, Germany,
17.02.2011, 18:37

@ w3a537

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

> How do I determine this?
>
> I have 3 different memory display programs.
> Trust me.
>
> The 44k in continous.

Use the appropriate option for MEM.

---
l

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
18.02.2011, 22:25

@ cm

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

I did, MMY /A (all) and it says 44k continous still free.
JEMMEX is very good. I have much more available upper
memory than with UMBPCI and LOWDMA.

Steve ...

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
18.02.2011, 22:39

@ cm

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

The problem I have found it.

I always run my ecutables through an EXE packer
either UPX or APACK or PPACK.

If they still work and did not grow in size
then I keep them in packed form.

For some reason DOSLFNM loads high and works
just fine when NOT PACKED but only loads low
when PACKED.

Just a minor qwirk. It is in upper memory now
taking 12,704 bytes and I still have 34,688
bytes free.

JEMMEX is wonderful.

All is good now.

Steve Broshears.

RayeR(R)

Homepage

CZ,
18.02.2011, 23:17

@ w3a537

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

Yes, UPXing may be tricky. Always make a backup because if some program doesn't work it may not work even after decompressing... In some case it may looks like it's working but it crashes under special condition. So it takes some time to test it if everything is ok...

---
DOS gives me freedom to unlimited HW access.

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
19.02.2011, 02:12

@ RayeR

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

Thank you.

Steve ...

w3a537(R)

E-mail

Colorado Springs CO USA,
19.02.2011, 05:59

@ RayeR

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

I just found another one!

If you compress CWSDPMI.EXE and load it it uses 44,752 bytes LOW memory.
The uncompressed CWSBPMI uses 74,768 bytes.

Both seem to work???

I'm playing it safe and NOT compressing.

Steve ...

RayeR(R)

Homepage

CZ,
19.02.2011, 14:20

@ w3a537

DOSLFN LOW OR HIGH

Yes, compressing CWSDPMI.EXE is bad idea. It has some configurable data area set by cwsparam that cannot be changed then...

---
DOS gives me freedom to unlimited HW access.

Back to the board
Thread view  Mix view  Order
15196 Postings in 1365 Threads, 250 registered users, 14 users online (0 registered, 14 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum