CompuServe Thread

Forum unknown · Utilities/Other Aps

MyCLI vers. 1.1

11 messages in this thread
#13528From: John MesiavechApr 2, 1986 12:36 AM
This is just a caution about the MyCLI program floating around many BBS systems. The latest release of it has apparently NOT been fully debugged, and it has some serious problems when multitasking. 1) The program will take over the serial port when the program is started IF the terminal option is on. This, of course, prevents it's use with any other communications software, since the modem is IMMEDIATELY disconnected from the phone line when this happens. 2) For some reason, when running the program from a hard drive, the program will crash WOrkbench, making it as if the LoadWB command was never issued. This can be somewhat annoying, since it means a reboot. This has also been noted at times when the hard drive is not even installed, so it is NOT the hard drive driver or controller causing this problem.
#13605From: John FoustApr 2, 1986 11:38 AM
A friend of mine wrote the MyCLI version 1.1, are you talking about the version recently posted to People Link? If so, there are a few other problems in that version – commands like Diskcopy, which access the keyboard as in "Press RETURN to continue", will hang MyCLI if entered at the MyCLI prompt. Normally, you should "RUN MYCLI", to leave a free, normal CLI task around, and do those sorts of commands from there. The problems with the serial port aren't the responsibility of my friend, Rick Wirch, since he never touched that code – it was all in version 1.0, and he doesn't modem, so he never updated it. BTW, a Manx version of MyCLI, which also cleaned up a small leap year bug, was posted to People Link a few days ago, thanks to D.J. James. Rick would like to see the new and improved versions, so he can play Keeper of the Source, since the original author, Mike Schwartz of Mt. View, CA, is not listed in the phone book. ??? I called the one Mike S. who was listed, and he said he had gotten a series of calls about MyCLI. To a non-computer person, these calls were quite amusing. Anyways, this program needs to multi-task better, and maybe even merge in some of the Unix-like shell that's been passed around. It needs version 2.0 to be really useful, I think. I'll harass Rick about these bugs.
#13675From: John MesiavechApr 2, 1986 11:33 PM
I believe that that's the one…..Supposedly ,there's a new one out (told to me by HR Laser) that has some of the major bugs fixed. Will upload it tonight.. as MYCLI.12. John
#13675From: John MesiavechApr 2, 1986 11:33 PM
I believe that that's the one…..Supposedly ,there's a new one out (told to me by HR Laser) that has some of the major bugs fixed. Will upload it tonight.. as MYCLI.12. John
#14038From: HR LaserApr 6, 1986 5:14 PM
JOhn…..missed the opportunity to reply to your earlier post about online's terrible capture buffer. Set the buffer size to 1K, instead of bigger than 64K. It will just keep appending the next K to the previous K, etc etc and will not truncate what is already there on the disk, as if, for instance, you set it for 64K, then capture a 70K file, you'll end up with only the last 6 K of your file!!! as the first 64K goes into outer space. Try it with a setting of 1K !!!
#14104From: John FoustApr 7, 1986 12:10 PM
Harv: I re-read the section of the manual that deals with this, when I first had trouble. The trouble is, I think in terms of buffers that ALWAYS spool to disk. That's why it's a _BUFFER_, right? The documentation doesn't say that a 64 K buffer won't spool to disk, so I assumed that it would. I still think it's a bug. I'd rather have a buffer that size, so it flushed only once in a while, especially since Online! seems to have severe always-behind-updating-the-screen problems. This is evident in the long time it takes CTRL/S to "stop" the flow of characters…
#14421From: RICH MEDVEDApr 11, 1986 12:49 AM
If you provide a filename when requested, the buffer will scroll to the disk no matter what size buffer you have selected. The problem seems to be that there is no double buffering, and/or a nak is not sent to the host while OnLine! is trying to write to the disk. Since a larger buffer takes longer to write, characters are lost. Using a 1K buffer, you'll get almost constant drive writes, but you will get everything. This problem was mentioned during Beta test (I was one of the testers, and I among others complained about it). Why it wasn't resolved was never explained.
#14421From: RICH MEDVEDApr 11, 1986 12:49 AM
If you provide a filename when requested, the buffer will scroll to the disk no matter what size buffer you have selected. The problem seems to be that there is no double buffering, and/or a nak is not sent to the host while OnLine! is trying to write to the disk. Since a larger buffer takes longer to write, characters are lost. Using a 1K buffer, you'll get almost constant drive writes, but you will get everything. This problem was mentioned during Beta test (I was one of the testers, and I among others complained about it). Why it wasn't resolved was never explained.
#14104From: John FoustApr 7, 1986 12:10 PM
Harv: I re-read the section of the manual that deals with this, when I first had trouble. The trouble is, I think in terms of buffers that ALWAYS spool to disk. That's why it's a _BUFFER_, right? The documentation doesn't say that a 64 K buffer won't spool to disk, so I assumed that it would. I still think it's a bug. I'd rather have a buffer that size, so it flushed only once in a while, especially since Online! seems to have severe always-behind-updating-the-screen problems. This is evident in the long time it takes CTRL/S to "stop" the flow of characters…
#14038From: HR LaserApr 6, 1986 5:14 PM
JOhn…..missed the opportunity to reply to your earlier post about online's terrible capture buffer. Set the buffer size to 1K, instead of bigger than 64K. It will just keep appending the next K to the previous K, etc etc and will not truncate what is already there on the disk, as if, for instance, you set it for 64K, then capture a 70K file, you'll end up with only the last 6 K of your file!!! as the first 64K goes into outer space. Try it with a setting of 1K !!!
#13605From: John FoustApr 2, 1986 11:38 AM
A friend of mine wrote the MyCLI version 1.1, are you talking about the version recently posted to People Link? If so, there are a few other problems in that version – commands like Diskcopy, which access the keyboard as in "Press RETURN to continue", will hang MyCLI if entered at the MyCLI prompt. Normally, you should "RUN MYCLI", to leave a free, normal CLI task around, and do those sorts of commands from there. The problems with the serial port aren't the responsibility of my friend, Rick Wirch, since he never touched that code – it was all in version 1.0, and he doesn't modem, so he never updated it. BTW, a Manx version of MyCLI, which also cleaned up a small leap year bug, was posted to People Link a few days ago, thanks to D.J. James. Rick would like to see the new and improved versions, so he can play Keeper of the Source, since the original author, Mike Schwartz of Mt. View, CA, is not listed in the phone book. ??? I called the one Mike S. who was listed, and he said he had gotten a series of calls about MyCLI. To a non-computer person, these calls were quite amusing. Anyways, this program needs to multi-task better, and maybe even merge in some of the Unix-like shell that's been passed around. It needs version 2.0 to be really useful, I think. I'll harass Rick about these bugs.