Mail Archives: djgpp/1996/06/01/06:47:56
John Brothers wrote:
>
> Howdy,
>
> Please forgive me if this topic has been hashed over before. I looked
> through this group, but I didn't see it. I would search more exhaustively,
> but since I'm not asking a question, I don't feel like it :)
>
> I (today) went through the task of upgrading to djgpp v2. Previously,
> I had used v1 w/DOS, and a week ago, I upgraded to Win95. My program
> compiled fine using v1 gcc. However, gdb no longer worked - it complained
> about dpmi, and all the various incarnations I tried all failed in one way
> or another.
>
> So I got the bare minimum v2 stuff (djdev, gcc272, bnu252? [and gdb])
> and installed - nothing would compile - gcc appeared to be encountering a
> segmentation violation. In fact, it would cause a MFU
> about 50% of the time, and Windows would demand that I reboot.
>
> I got the FAQ, and read through it, and noted the
> suggestion to use -v. This also seg viod right away. Finally, in desperation,
> I tried to compile on the command line, instead of with make, and it worked.
>
> I went and retrieved the new version of make, and everything now works
> perfectly.
>
> So, I would like to make the following suggestion: for the readme.1st file
> in the v2 directory, I think that mak373b.zip should also be a mandatory
> file to download, if you've recently upgraded to Win95.
>
> Thanks,
> John
> --
> Do you have a right not to be offended?
I would try making a boot floppy that has config.sys and autoexec.bat
on it the way you want for djgpp. I wouldn't even try to run djgpp
in a dos box. Also djgpp runs fastest on my system with a large read
write cached smartdrive. Windows 95 rems out your smartdrive when it
loads windows. With a large smartdrv I've found the ramdrive useless.
- Raw text -