[Coco] Re: Re: Shell + 2.2a

[Ray Watts]

Sorry, Charlie.  If you are using Shell+2.2a right out of the LZH, 
please disregard everything I said after hi ~;=)>.  Your problem sounded 
so familiar to some I had that I just sounded off.  Good luck!


Charlie wrote:


> Please excuse my ignorance :) So, I'm loading too many thing into 

> memory  and Shell+2.2a being bigger is using too much ram along with 

> everything  else loaded ?

>

> I don't know enough to understand what merging things with Shell+2.1 

> has  to do with using Shell2.2a right out of the LZH file.

>

> Is it something in my Startup file that does the merging when the 

> system  boots? I'll look at that when I get home.

>

> I know I'm going to be a big pain with 10000 questions, however, it's  

> almost as if I'm feeling "YAY, something doesn't work! Now I can 

> figure  out why and learn a bunch of things."

>

> Thanks,

>

> Charlie

>

>

> On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:21:16 -0700, Ray Watts  

> <rayanddoraleew at earthlink.net> wrote:

>

>> You may not have the problem I described if you don't remember 

>> merging  some commands with your Shell.  In the old days it was 

>> common to merge  enough commands with the shell to almost reach the 

>> 1024X8-512 limit.   This allowed you to have these commands in memory 

>> without using up any  additional DAT blocks.  Shell+ 2.2a is a larger 

>> file than Shell+2.1, so  if you had a merged block and replaced 2.1 

>> with 2.2a, you would go over  that limit, which, I believe caused a 

>> problem like you described.  Hey,  someone.  Correct this foggy old 

>> mind if I'm wrong.

>>

>> Charlie wrote:

>>

>>> What can I do to fix the problem? What files were merged? I know 

>>> most  of  my OS9 system was put together many years ago, and I 

>>> remember  replacing  many commands with ones from delphi.

>>>

>>> I don't know very much about OS9 but I would love to understand it  

>>> better.  Not to mention get everything working with Shell+2.2a :)

>>>

>>> Thanks.

>>>

>>> Charlie

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:15:06 -0700, Ray Watts   

>>> <rayanddoraleew at earthlink.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>>

>>>> Isn't that the notorious case where files merged with Shell+2.1 

>>>> was  JUST  below 1024X8-512?  Then when you replaced 2.1 with a 

>>>> larger 2.2a  you  went over the 8k limit.  Sure sounds like it.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>

>>

>>

>

>

>