Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

"That Will Be ALL!" For UIDE and USB! (Announce)

posted by Jack(R) E-mail, Fresno, California USA, 06.06.2010, 20:37

On Bret Johnson's forum at --

Note his last post dated Tue Jun 01, 2010 6:18 PM, in which he
says that UIDE's external interface is "essentially unusable",
that I am unwilling to do changes to UIDE's interrupt handling
and his users will have to "live with" USBDRIVE not being able
to be removed, when his next USBDRIVE is released.

I do hope folks "Understand BETTER!" than what Bret Johnson is
trying to make his readers believe!

I consider UIDE to be a "hard" SYSTEM driver, one which caches
essential devices like the system hard-disk and CD/DVD drives,
and thus people should NEVER want to unload it! I have been
asked about RDISK unloading, but absolutely NOBODY before Bret
Johnson ever inquired re: unloading UIDE. However, he seems
to want ALL drivers to be unloadable, and he very disdainfully
"puts down" ones that cannot be, even drivers that worked fine
BEFORE his USB showed-up!

Re: modifying UIDE's interrupt handling, I see no reason to do
this either. UIDE was written to "hook" Int 13h and thus get
"last look" at any I-O request BEFORE the actual BIOS, so UIDE
could "intercept" I-O for disks/diskettes and cache it. Bret
Johnson now wants HIS driver to get such a "last look", and so
I am "expected" to change UIDE to meet some new and previously
UNNEEDED interrupt-convention, merely to satisfy HIM! There
are many other drivers NOT using this convention that ALSO run
fine without it, and require NO changes to GO ON running fine!

Re: UIDE's external interface being "essentially unusable", it
in fact DOES work just fine. What Bret Johnson does not like
is that it does not allocate/deallocate cache-unit numbers, so
two different drivers can use the same number and corrupt each
others' data. This might occur if only "trainees" used UIDE!
Just a few friendly E-Mails, among the FEW of us who must deal
with cache-unit numbers, would ELIMINATE any need for allocate
and deallocate logic. UIDE now "reserves" cache-units 48 to
55 for CD/DVD drives, and its comments could ALSO note another
block of cache-units is "reserved" for USB. But Bret Johnson
noted in a PM that no allocate/deallocate code is "LUDICROUS"!

So much for "friendly" E-Mails, which I thus decided to END!!!

In 2006, I did NOT like being made by the "FreeDOS Pundits" to
look like a "bad guy" for creating XMGR (then QHIMEM), instead
of working ONLY with their FD-HIMEM. The above-noted post on
Bret Johnson's forum now tries to make just ME appear like the
bad guy, for REFUSING to "obey" ONLY HIS "agenda"! I did NOT
like 2006 -- at least they "went SILENT", after JEMM386/HIMEMX
sent FDEMM386/FDHIMEM "down the pipes!" -- and I do NOT accept
"LUDICROUS" applied to me now, for "Refusing to OBEY ..."!!

UIDE's design IS NOT the problem here! UIDE works fine, just
"as is", and I have NO reason to make any changes! As I also
did write to Khusraw and to Johnson Lam, UIDE in fact COULD be
made to run with USBDRIVE, "as is" and with NO changes, and in
complete support of ALL items on that "other agenda"!

But, I shall remain SILENT! After "all of the above", I hope
everybody realizes why UIDE with USB now flatly DISGUSTS ME!!!

Now, it is time for BREAKFAST at 11:35 A.M. after I can manage
to stop "Chewing NAILS!", in this case the METAL ones!!!

(Account disabled on user's request.)


Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
15297 Postings in 1378 Threads, 254 registered users, 13 users online (0 registered, 13 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum