Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


Sign in to follow this  
ppgrainbow

MS-DOS Shell Issue

Recommended Posts

Hi there!

I've been having a awesome time running MS-DOS 6.22 (and other operating systems) in the DOS Multiboot virtual machine (Virtual PC 2007). The guest machine loads the MS-DOS 6 Shell at startup and I have configured a awful lot of software to launch on that OS.

The problem is that the boot drive where MS-DOS 6.22 resides has nearly 10,000 files and 450+ directories (I'm pretty luck to see that MS-DOS Shell is capable of reading up to 65,535 files before wrapping back at zero), I get this error message when attempting to view the files on the boot drive itself:

MS-DOS Shell error.png

Have you ever run into this issue when you have several thousands of files totaling hundreds of megabytes of used disk space on the drive alone? Is this a bug with the MS-DOS/PC-DOS Shell and it is unable to search so many files that it can find? Can this issue be corrected by the way even with 64 MB of usable memory installed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know... have you tried a different File Manager program?

This website has lots of File Managers to choose from, I happen to use several of them on my computer.

http://reimagery.com/fsfd/fileman1.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is probably not the 64 Mb of total memory it is the "real DOS" memory, like the 640 Kb or the 1 Mb:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS_memory_management

Use another volume, have less files per volume, or as suggested earlier try with another filemanager, but I doubt that it will solve the issue with so many files and directories.

What you report here:

http://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37021&start=20#p456296

however will need some clarifications, DOS 6.22 does not support FAT32.

jaclaz
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ZortMcGort11 said:

I don't know... have you tried a different File Manager program?

This website has lots of File Managers to choose from, I happen to use several of them on my computer.

http://reimagery.com/fsfd/fileman1.htm

I've been looking at finding a different file manager/menu system that will handle so many files, but no such luck. If I have found a good replacement menu system, I'll let you know and go from here. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jaclaz said:

It is probably not the 64 Mb of total memory it is the "real DOS" memory, like the 640 Kb or the 1 Mb:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOS_memory_management

Use another volume, have less files per volume, or as suggested earlier try with another filemanager, but I doubt that it will solve the issue with so many files and directories.

What you report here:

http://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37021&start=20#p456296

however will need some clarifications, DOS 6.22 does not support FAT32.

jaclaz
 

Thanks for the help. I did post in the Vogons forum late last year. It wasn't until MS-DOS 7.1/Windows 95B that FAT32 support became mainstream. FAT32 was introduced as early as MS-DOS 6.23, but it was only available for the US government, military and banking institutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe give FreeDOS a try. I remember installing it some years ago, and found it to be more worth while than MS-DOS. I like DOS, I think it's great, but having to live within the limited confine of its memory and hard drive limits, would be too much trouble for me. I think FreeDOS fixes *some* of those issues. And all the DOS programs I tried seemed to work. The only downfall is that Windows 3.1 won't work on it.

People are still updating freedos too, so as soon as they can get Windows 3.1 to work, I'd definitely start building my ultimate Windows 3.1 machine :-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeDOS

http://www.freedos.org/download/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ZortMcGort11 said:

Maybe give FreeDOS a try. I remember installing it some years ago, and found it to be more worth while than MS-DOS. I like DOS, I think it's great, but having to live within the limited confine of its memory and hard drive limits, would be too much trouble for me. I think FreeDOS fixes *some* of those issues. And all the DOS programs I tried seemed to work. The only downfall is that Windows 3.1 won't work on it.

People are still updating freedos too, so as soon as they can get Windows 3.1 to work, I'd definitely start building my ultimate Windows 3.1 machine :-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeDOS

http://www.freedos.org/download/

I don't think that switching to FreeDOS is going to help. I'm fine with MS-DOS 6.22 and the 2 GB FAT16 limitation. Unfortunately, FreeDOS's CHKDSK program is riddled with bugs on FAT16 formatted hard disks.

I'm also using FreeDOS on the 8 GB FAT32 partition (first hard disk), but only as doing maintenance work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem solved. I switched to Fifth Generation Systems Direct Access 5.1 and everything is all good! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, could you please share how/where you got an install-able version of Fifth Generation Systems Direct Access 5.1?  I'm not familiar with the app and don't know if it's still available or not, or whether it's a free, share, or commercial app.

Cheers and Regards

Edited by bphlpt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bphlpt said:

Out of curiosity, could you please share how/where you got an install-able version of Fifth Generation Systems Direct Access 5.1?  I'm not familiar with the app and don't know if it's still available or not, or whether it's a free, share, or commercial app.

Cheers and Regards

I sometimes wonder if the Fifth Amendment is applicable in cases like this ... :dubbio:

Anyway, see if this:
https://books.google.it/books?id=9T0EAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA80&dq=direct+access&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiX-t_v7ZPOAhWjJZoKHRsrA4UQ6AEIFzAA#v=onepage&q=direct access&f=false

answers a few of your questions ...

Skip to end of page 90 for "value" considerations, summed in the following:

Spoiler

in early 1992 US$ 595 for a single license was considered "fair". :w00t: or "good value" ... 
 


 

jaclaz


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WHAT!!!  $595 in 1992!!!  According to this, that's the equivalent to over $!000 today!

Well, that answers that, then.  Especially since they also said:

Quote

It is a fine menu system for network administrators who want a quick and simple solution. The flip side of simplicity is a lack of features; Direct Access has comparatively less menu control flexibility than competing products.

And again, that was back in 1992.  I think I'll pass. :)

Then again, looking at page 93, I see that in 1992 a 33MHz 486 EISA Gateway2000 [ 80486, 8 MB RAM, 5.25" and 3.5" floppy, 340 MB HDD, 16-Bit VGA, a 14" monitor, and Windows 3.0 ] sold for $3895 (almost $6700 today), so I guess value is relative.

But I still think I'll pass. :)

Cheers and Regards

Edited by bphlpt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The sad thing :( is that I am old, and have a good memory and I remember having actually paid:

in 1986 5.000.000 Lire (that would be roughly 5.000 € of today) for a Fax machine (yes, thermal paper that you had to photocopy otherwise it would quickly fade away)

in 1992 8.500.000 Lire (that would be around 7.000 € of today) for a IBM PS/2 (no, not a mouse, an actual PC, with a 386 AND math co-processor)

in 1994 4.000.000 Lire (that would be around 3.000 € of today) for my beloved Compaq Concerto (a 486DX with 8 - eight! - Mb of RAM and a 120 Mb hard disk in a compact, portable, tablet-like device with detachable keyboard and touch - with special pen - screen)

OT, and I will probably have something to say about it on the appropriate thread as soon as I will have had the time to familiarize myself with it, I just (two days ago) bought a seemingly nice (but el-cheapo ;)) 8" tablet with a case including a bluetooth keyboard, 2 Gb Ram, 32 Gb on board storage, dual boot Android and Windows 10 for around € 140.

jaclaz
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2016 at 0:28 AM, bphlpt said:

Out of curiosity, could you please share how/where you got an install-able version of Fifth Generation Systems Direct Access 5.1?  I'm not familiar with the app and don't know if it's still available or not, or whether it's a free, share, or commercial app.

Cheers and Regards

I got it from eBay for Christmas a few years back for $30 if I'm correct. It is a commercial product that is no longer sold. The product that I bought didn't even include the Use's Manual. :(

I'm trying to learn how to use the Custom Application feature in the Menu Maintenance and the Custom Parameter Prompting.

Edited by ppgrainbow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite likely that dosshell chokes on the number of directories and folders it has to show.  It's quite common.

There are other things you can make it better.  You could run the thing in TEXT mode, and avoid drives and directories with too many items. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, os2fan2 said:

It is quite likely that dosshell chokes on the number of directories and folders it has to show.  It's quite common.

There are other things you can make it better.  You could run the thing in TEXT mode, and avoid drives and directories with too many items. 

Running MS-DOS in text mode has no effect when trying to list a huge number of directories and folders it has to show. I still get a "Not enough memory. Operation cannot be completed." error.

It turns out that MS-DOS Shell is a 16-bit file management and menuing system program that has a lot of bugs that will never be addressed. Even if that's the case, most of the features in MS-DOS Shell are still usable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...