Arachne at FreeLists---The Arachne Fan Club! On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 10:26:59 +1000, da Silva, Joe wrote: > The reason I ask is because the Arachne 1.73;GPL package > includes LSPPP 0.75, so it is easy to overwrite another, > newer version of LSPPP (eg. 1.01) with this older (buggy) version. I never realized that. Yes, I just checked and it is there. > You can type "lsppp /?" to see what version you really have. It tells me that it is v1.01. > Greg, how suitable the 8250/16450 is, depends on > the situation. If you have near 100% CPU availability > to service the UART, you can achieve great things > with an 8250/16450. However, you don't always have > this luxury, depending on what applications and > drivers and TSR's are running. So in practice, you > invariably need a 16550A UART, which has a FIFO > that can buffer a few incoming data bytes while the > CPU is busy drawing some graphics, or writing to > disk, or whatever. So with graphics downloads turned off, I can expect the 8250/16450 UART to give me _eight_minute_ delays on a 2kbyte block of a 12203 byte page? I don't think so.... > This is something most Arachne users will already > be aware of, so you will find very few others here > using an 8250/16450 UART. There probably aren't many using a 486/33MHz CPU, either, or only 12 meg of RAM, or a 512M hard disk, but that's what I'm stuck with. I would upgrade if I could afford to! But I can't afford to, so that is that! > Your comment about M$-DOS is interesting, although > I have doubts about its accuracy. What do you mean "doubts about its accuracy"? Are you implying that I'm "stretching the truth" when I say I have a lot less trouble with the MS-DOS + Arachne combination? Sheesh! A 7kbyte page that takes over over 2 minutes under OpenDOS, and a 12k page that can't get past halfway after eight minutes.... These pages download in less than 10 seconds under MS-DOS. I'm no lover of Micro$not, but what accuracy do you want? Greg M. Arachne at FreeLists -- Arachne, The Web Browser/Suite for DOS and Linux --