From:	phyphor AT SCREW!_YOU_SPAMMERBOY!usa.net (LMB)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: OK people, I NEED help!
Organization:	YEA, DREAM ON! Inc.
Reply-To:	phyphor AT DOT DOT usa DOT net (nospam) (GET-SCREWED-SPAMMERS)
Message-ID:	<35affae3.10411589@news.inreach.com>
References:	<6ojoj3$4bg AT netaxs DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Lines:	50
Date:	Sat, 18 Jul 1998 01:16:48 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	209.142.3.159
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Fri, 17 Jul 1998 18:16:48 PDT
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

On Wed, 15 Jul 1998 22:26:51 -0400, "Anakin" <armybrat AT randomc DOT com>
wrote:

>Wow. This is REALLY weird. I know this is DJGPP, but since it involves
>changing the environment settings, I think you can help.
>
>I just messed up my autoexec.bat file because I took out those %PATH%
>things. It then said it couldn't load windows!! What do they do, the %PATH%
>things? Anyway, this is what gets me: In my SET PATH=... stuff,
>I have the path for DJGPP, my printer, and a DJGPP toolkit thing. What I
>DON"T have is WINDOWS in my set path!! It still runs fine though. I've
>noticed that everybody has windows in there SET PATH but me! I don't even
>think that the default SET PATH had windows in there. What I DO have is
>this:

Um, yea... you were supposed to tack c:\djgpp onto the END of your
path....without deleting anything...


>
>PATH=C:\IBM......      since, of course, I have a IBM computer (Aptiva). Is
>that the same as a
>SET PATH=C:\windows...   ?
>
>Since I don't have it, SHOULD I set windows somewhere in my SET PATH? It
>still works fine without it.
>
>Also (I know I should have this in a DOS only newsgroup, but DJGPP involves
>DOS, plus I like this group)
>when I bought my computer, in my config.sys, the BUFFER was set like so:
>BUFFER=20 or something
>a long that line (it WAS set at 20). NOW it is set at 50. Note that I DO
>have lock ups after I open and close about three large progs at a time (or
>close my internet connection quickly) . Somebody told me that because it was
>at 50, that is what made it lock up. Is that true? ( I have 32 megabytes of
>RAM, in care you're wondering)

Don't sweat this, this is just small memory buffers (512 each, so 
512 * 50 is 25,600 bytes... (A megabyte is (roughly)
one MILLION bytes, so the buffers statement ISN'T your problem....
Are you sure your memory chip(s) are working properly?

>
>Thanks for listening to my ramblings,
>Anakin
>************************
>
>"Good God!! LIVE man!!!"
>

- Raw text -