> Bertho ???, You may call me Czerno, Herr Ehlert
>> You can't escape having to explain what "adverse effects" you were evoking, >> now anyway. > command.com is a 'normal' program. just allocating DOS memory will > give you an environment at ~1800:0. not such a good idea. You are joking, Herr Ehlert, richtig ? Launching a basic FreeDOS+FreeCOM virtual machine while I'm typing... No upper memory. Using (Jack Ellis's, I think ) XMGR.SYS. MEM /D indicates the ENV would be at *526:0*, /not/ such a /bad idea/. And this is /with/ VMware's BIOS 5 kilobytes EBDA relocated low, mind you. Of course the kernel is in HMA, which may be what your reply eluded ! And EVEN if for some reason HMA was not available or not given to the DOS kernel, what makes you deem an environment at ~1800:0 not such a good idea ? I this all your deep reason for forcing the master ENV up at 9xxxx ? In which way other than your respectable personal preference is it better? This is highly ridiculous. At least provide a choice. Leave it to power /users/ to determine for themselves what memory layout is best in /their/ situation. Ah, but - sorry, I was forgetting - you /don't care/ much about your users. No wonder you don't have many. > usually ~9f00:0 is a much better place. > and juggling memory around (beyond what is already done) was so far never necessary (and still isn't) How do you say "arrogance" in German, Herr /Doktor/ Ehlert ? Wiedersehen -- Czerno ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user