Re: Error message when using U2 120 and new initiation routing
- From: "Wengier W" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "wengierwu" for DMARC)
- To: "xywrite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xywrite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 16:46:59 +0000 (UTC)
Hi Bill,
During recent discussions with Carl, we again talked about the scan code issue
that occurred in vDosXy. And it turns out it is indeed a problem of vDosXy, as
the problem does not occur in vDos-lfn. So vDos-lfn users are not affected by
this problem and can use the routine normally.
Wengier
- From: "Carl Distefano" <cld@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: xywrite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2015 19:50:41 -0500
Reply to note from Bill Troop <billtroop@xxxxxxxxx> Fri, 02 Jan 2015
10:31:54 +0000
Bill,
... do we know why these problems exist under vDosXy?
Philosophically, wouldn't the better solution be for it to
change?
In a word, no. What I'm referrring to aren't problems with vDosXy,
but differences stemming from the fact that in vDosXy, Xy-DOS is
effectively just another Win program running under the host Windows
system, whereas in other environments Xy is a DOS program running in
a Windows VDM (whether under the host 32-bit Windows or in a virtual
32-bit system running in a VM under 64-bit Windows). I haven't quite
grokked the differences yet -- in many U2-related contexts, they're
subtle -- but I feel that the penny, perhaps inspired by the ball in
Times Square, is about to drop.
--
Carl Distefano
cld@xxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
