What does (did) pckbd.sys do?
Aaron Lawrence
process commander.
I wonder if anyone from Stardock could comment on what it did?
Thanks
--
aaronl at consultant dot com
http://homepages.visp.co.nz/~aaronlawrence
..Gross Ignorance: 144 times worse than ordinary ignorance.
Kris Kwilas [Stardock]
trapping as well as entering the full-screen VIO mode. As best
I recall, IBM made changes around FixPak 9 and this no longer
provided those additional functions.
Kris
"Aaron Lawrence" <aaro...@consultantSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.18df170ee...@news.stardock.com...
Aaron Lawrence
> I believe this was what enabled the hotkeys to allow C-A-D
> trapping as well as entering the full-screen VIO mode. As best
> I recall, IBM made changes around FixPak 9 and this no longer
> provided those additional functions.
Hi Kris,
Hm. I understood that pckbd.sys was the thing that DID keep working,
including the latest versions of OS/2.
The replacement keyboard driver, kbdbase.sys, was the thing that got
broken.
Also, that pckbd.sys can NOT provide C-A-D, only the replacement
kbdbase.sys could do that.
So, it seems pckbd.sys somehow hooks the keyboard globally, but without
having to replace any existing code. This is what I would like to know
how to do...
Cheers
Aaron
Kris Kwilas [Stardock]
with the authors. :(
Kris
"Aaron Lawrence" <aaro...@consultantSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.18e051e73...@news.stardock.com...
Aaron Lawrence
> with the authors. :(
OK. I realise that. I just thought you might remember something about
this particular bit of code.
Thanks.
Stefano Sutti
Not the best possible period to make the US newspapers front pages :-),
but eCS 1.1 is out.
Stefano Sutti
Studio Legale Sutti
Brad Wardell [Stardock]
"Stefano Sutti" <mail...@sutti.com> wrote in message
news:3E7CAC89...@sutti.com...
>
> Not the best possible period to make the US newspapers front pages :-),
> but eCS 1.1 is out.
So in a nutshell, what's new in 1.1?
Brad
Jaime A. Cruz, Jr.
Hash: SHA1
From: "Jaime A. Cruz, Jr." <Spam...@Bite.Me>
Message-ID: <wnvzrpehmanffnhjvat...@news.stardock.com>
References: <MPG.18df170ee...@news.stardock.com> <U7lLEX96...@prospero.stardock.local> <MPG.18e051e73...@news.stardock.com> <JnLdGDP7...@prospero.stardock.local> <MPG.18e1cfbfd...@news.stardock.com> <3E7CAC89...@sutti.com> <T$ouh29A...@prospero.stardock.local>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 07:27:21 -0400 (EDT)
Reply-To: "Jaime A. Cruz, Jr." <Spam...@Bite.Me>
X-Newsreader: PMINews 2.00.1205 For OS/2
Organization: Nassau Wings Motorcycle Club
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: eComStation 1.1
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003 01:51:22 -0400, Brad Wardell [Stardock] wrote:
>
>
>"Stefano Sutti" <mail...@sutti.com> wrote in message
>news:3E7CAC89...@sutti.com...
>>
>> Not the best possible period to make the US newspapers front pages :-),
>> but eCS 1.1 is out.
>
>So in a nutshell, what's new in 1.1?
>
"To announce that there must no no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American people."
- - Theodore Roosevelt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0 OS/2 for non-commercial use
Comment: PGP 5.0 for OS/2
Charset: cp850
wj8DBQE+nTAJgvzYfxgMc34RAjo+AKDzWqT6ZE76noepPJEcdFod+CQW3ACg6epT
pjpyBisGottmE6FWy7pkWT8=
=ZMSa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Stefano Sutti
"Brad Wardell [Stardock]" wrote:
> "Stefano Sutti" <mail...@sutti.com> wrote in message
> news:3E7CAC89...@sutti.com...
> >
> > Not the best possible period to make the US newspapers front pages :-),
> > but eCS 1.1 is out.
>
> So in a nutshell, what's new in 1.1?
This is a very good question, I understand that SS and Mensys are eventually
preparing a detailed list of what has changed... :-)
AFAIK, 1.1 should include, if I am not wrong:
- MCP2/ACP2 as its core, rather than MCP1/ACP1:
- a better hw sniffer, especially for NICs and sound cards;
- a new installer (making LVM optional, and allowing CID or one-pass Cd
install);
- an improved interface, thanks to eWorkplace (including a different "bar"
and a multiple desktop feature);
- an improved MMOS2 (some classes replaced, etc.)
- a new dialer/VPN client based on ISDNPM;
- SIO, DANI and Scitech drivers as default;
- NTFS support out-of-the-box;
- Acrobat 4.05, Flash 5 and Java 1.41;
- IBM Browser/Mozilla along with the old Netscape Communicator.
I do not have in production yet, but I think that more or less that's it. Not
bad for a 1.1 over a 1.0 version. Of course, the fear is always that it might
be a swan's song, but I do not see that any OS/2-eCS user might have reason
to run any other version of the OS in the future.
Stefano Sutti
"Brad Wardell [Stardock]" wrote:
> "Stefano Sutti" <mail...@sutti.com> wrote in message
> news:3E7CAC89...@sutti.com...
> >
> > Not the best possible period to make the US newspapers front pages :-),
> > but eCS 1.1 is out.
>
> So in a nutshell, what's new in 1.1?
This is a very good question, I understand that SS and Mensys are eventually
preparing a detailed list of what has changed... :-)
AFAIK, 1.1 should include, if I am not wrong:
- MCP2/ACP2 as its core, rather than MCP1/ACP1:
- a better hw sniffer, especially for NICs and sound cards;
- a new installer (making LVM optional, and allowing CID or one-pass Cd
install);
- an improved interface, thanks to eWorkplace (including a different "bar"
and a multiple desktop feature);
- an improved MMOS2 (some classes replaced, etc.)
- a new dialer/VPN client based on ISDNPM;
- SIO, DANI and Scitech drivers as default;
- NTFS support out-of-the-box;
- Acrobat 4.05, Flash 5 and Java 1.41
I do not have in production yet, but I think that more or less that's it. Not
bad for a 1.1 over a 1.0 version. Of course, the fear is always that it might
be a swan's song, but I do not see that any OS/2-eCS user might have reason
to run any other version of the OS in the future.
Stefano Sutti
Studio Legale Sutti
Steve Wendt
> - a new installer (making LVM optional, and allowing CID or one-pass Cd
> install);
Have they really made LVM optional? If so, does it use DANIDASD or the
old version of OS2DASD?
Also, I saw references to multiple "phases" of the install, which
contradicts the "one-pass CD install" - if you have more information
about that, please pass it on.
> - NTFS support out-of-the-box;
Is this something new, or the buggy stuff that development was dropped
on ages ago?
Brad Wardell
"Steve Wendt" <spa...@forgetit.org> wrote in message
news:Phfr76iC...@prospero.stardock.local...
NTFS read only support which is kind of useless for most users.
Brad
Martin Nisshagen
"Brad Wardell" <bwar...@stardock.com> wrote in message
news:gKt5ufpC...@prospero.stardock.local...
:
: "Steve Wendt" <spa...@forgetit.org> wrote in message
: news:Phfr76iC...@prospero.stardock.local...
: > > - NTFS support out-of-the-box;
: >
: > Is this something new, or the buggy stuff that development was dropped
: > on ages ago?
: >
:
: NTFS read only support which is kind of useless for most users.
Yes, I'm kind of surprised that they haven't managed to get normal
(read/write) support for NTFS as Win9x and DOS has had such things for years
(and to some degree Unices like Linux as well).
Best regards,
m a r t i n | n
--
Martin Nisshagen
http://194.236.153.211/
Steve Wendt
> : NTFS read only support which is kind of useless for most users.
>
> Yes, I'm kind of surprised that they haven't managed to get normal
> (read/write) support for NTFS as Win9x and DOS has had such things for years
> (and to some degree Unices like Linux as well).
I suspect this is a port of the stable NTFS Linux driver, which is read
only. There has been work on a read/write driver, but I don't know its
current status concerning stability (since I don't use NTFS, I don't
personally care - I only have an academic interest).
Carsten Hintz
> "Brad Wardell" <bwar...@stardock.com> wrote in message
<...>
> :
> : NTFS read only support which is kind of useless for most users.
>
I wonder why one should think so. while I was multi-booting different
operating systems my goal was to have access to all data from any booted
OS. this was most successfull froma booted OS/2 at that time. iving all
OSes write access to the boot/system partitions of a different OS would
have been something I would have never dared due to decurity risks.
> Yes, I'm kind of surprised that they haven't managed to get normal
> (read/write) support for NTFS as Win9x and DOS has had such things for years
> (and to some degree Unices like Linux as well).
>
'has had for years' is only partly right as NTFS' format details were a
moving target since its introduction (NT 3.51?). to say that there has
been constant work on drivers fow DOS would have been more adequate.
a related question: when I was multi-booting, I had either a HPFS data
partition that was shared between OS/2 and Win NT(pinball.sys) or a
FAT32 partition for the same use. collegues of mine nowadays use OpenJFS
partitions to share data between eCS, OS/2, various Unices and whatnot.
the question has arisen some times what drivers exist for Windows 2000
to access (read only would be enough) JFS. do you have a link at hand?
don't bash me, I am a lucky fan of VPC (at work Windows host, at home
eCS host) and have quit all booting around ever since. sharing data can
be so easy... :-)
kind regards,
Carsten
Martin Nisshagen
"Carsten Hintz" <Carste...@gmx.de> wrote in message
news:3EA8F922...@gmx.de...
: > Yes, I'm kind of surprised that they haven't managed to get normal
: > (read/write) support for NTFS as Win9x and DOS has had such things for
years
: > (and to some degree Unices like Linux as well).
: >
:
: 'has had for years' is only partly right as NTFS' format details were a
: moving target since its introduction (NT 3.51?). to say that there has
: been constant work on drivers fow DOS would have been more adequate.
Ok, I can agree with that.
That said NTFS was introduced in 1993 with NT 3.1, and hasn't really changed
much since then. They have added new features (like encryption, compression,
etc), and added support for larger disks, but otherwise it's very much the
same.
: a related question: when I was multi-booting, I had either a HPFS data
: partition that was shared between OS/2 and Win NT(pinball.sys) or a
: FAT32 partition for the same use. collegues of mine nowadays use OpenJFS
Yes. When I had OS/2 and NT (and Win3 in the beginning) on the same machine
I used a FAT drive for exchanging data between them.
: the question has arisen some times what drivers exist for Windows 2000
: to access (read only would be enough) JFS. do you have a link at hand?
Never heard of such thing.
: don't bash me, I am a lucky fan of VPC (at work Windows host, at home
: eCS host) and have quit all booting around ever since. sharing data can
: be so easy... :-)
Yes, and another (but much more expensive option) is to have a dedicated
server (or desktop with peer support) and share everything over the network
(for example TCP/IP with CIFS, who most OS supports).
As allways, different solutions for different needs.
Kevin Krieser
> "Carsten Hintz" <Carste...@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:3EA8F922...@gmx.de...
> : > Yes, I'm kind of surprised that they haven't managed to get normal
> : > (read/write) support for NTFS as Win9x and DOS has had such things for
> years
> : > (and to some degree Unices like Linux as well).
> : >
> :
> : 'has had for years' is only partly right as NTFS' format details were a
> : moving target since its introduction (NT 3.51?). to say that there has
> : been constant work on drivers fow DOS would have been more adequate.
>
> Ok, I can agree with that.
>
> That said NTFS was introduced in 1993 with NT 3.1, and hasn't really changed
> much since then. They have added new features (like encryption, compression,
> etc), and added support for larger disks, but otherwise it's very much the
> same.
Of course, there was the service pack during NT4 days (about the time
the Windows 2000 betas came out?) that change the format enough that you
couldn't read the disk with earlier NT4 versions. Made a mess for
booting more than 1 copy of NT, or for reinstalling the base NT4 over it.
Martin Nisshagen
"Kevin Krieser" <kkrie...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1sryHy5C...@prospero.stardock.local...
: Of course, there was the service pack during NT4 days (about the time
: the Windows 2000 betas came out?) that change the format enough that you
: couldn't read the disk with earlier NT4 versions. Made a mess for
: booting more than 1 copy of NT, or for reinstalling the base NT4 over it.
Yes, they made a smaller change in NTFS between NT4 and Windows 2000, and
released a service pack (SP4) for NT4 which could convert those volumes into
the newer 2000-compatible format (so you could dual boot easily between NT4
and 2000).
Stefano Sutti
Brad Wardell wrote:
>
> NTFS read only support which is kind of useless for most users.
Already replied on the "read-only" status. Actually, the interesting thing
would be to have not only a read-write, but a bootable NTFS. Some people argue
instead that it would have been better to include the FAT32, but if one needs
it, it is just a download away, so I do not see that it was of essence to deal
with the legal issues to include it directly in eCS 1.1.
Stefano Sutti
Steve Wendt wrote:
> Stefano Sutti wrote:
>
> > - a new installer (making LVM optional, and allowing CID or one-pass Cd
> > install);
>
> Have they really made LVM optional? If so, does it use DANIDASD or the
> old version of OS2DASD?
Actually, they have replaced it with a "mini-LVM" which appears to be less
puzzling to the average user. Personally, I have nothing the "normal" LVM,
which is way better than all flavours of FDISK in my kind of config, and I
should have preferred something else...
> Also, I saw references to multiple "phases" of the install, which
> contradicts the "one-pass CD install" - if you have more information
> about that, please pass it on.
>
> > - NTFS support out-of-the-box;
>
> Is this something new, or the buggy stuff that development was dropped
> on ages ago?
Should be something new. OTOH, I read as of today from Kim Cheung:
"Work is ongoing with the NTFS driver. The only version I felt is
suitable for general release is the ReadOnly version you see in eCS 1.1."
Stefano Sutti
Steve Wendt
>>>- a new installer (making LVM optional, and allowing CID or one-pass Cd
>>
>>Have they really made LVM optional? If so, does it use DANIDASD or the
>>old version of OS2DASD?
>
> Actually, they have replaced it with a "mini-LVM" which appears to be less
> puzzling to the average user. Personally, I have nothing the "normal" LVM,
> which is way better than all flavours of FDISK in my kind of config, and I
> should have preferred something else...
Oh, you are talking about the replacement UI - that does NOT make LVM
optional!
Stefano Sutti
Steve Wendt wrote:
No, in my understanding LVM typical *features* and behaviour have been removed.
Hardly an advantage, for me, but the full thing is always there, for those who
know what to do with it.
Dale Erwin
I don't think that's exactly right, Stefano. The way I understand
it is the installer uses miniLVM, but after installation the full-blown
LVM is in control of your disk drives, just like in the CPs. But,
then, I was wrong once before :-) .
--
Dale Erwin
Vaughn Bender
I am running eCS 1.1
and your understanding is correct...once the system is loaded LVM is
exactly as any other previous release of ecs or MCP 1 or 2
Vaughn
>
> I don't think that's exactly right, Stefano. The way I understand
> it is the installer uses miniLVM, but after installation the full-blown
> LVM is in control of your disk drives, just like in the CPs. But,
> then, I was wrong once before :-) .
> --
> Dale Erwin
>
--
Reseller for Norman Data Antivirus
(http://www.stechgroup.ca).
-
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by
Norman Virus Control v5.4 for eCS
ProNews/2 v1.5.2.cp012
Stefano Sutti
Dale Erwin wrote:
> >>>Actually, they have replaced it with a "mini-LVM" which appears to be less
> >>>puzzling to the average user. Personally, I have nothing the "normal" LVM,
> >>>which is way better than all flavours of FDISK in my kind of config, and I
> >>>should have preferred something else...
> >>
> >>Oh, you are talking about the replacement UI - that does NOT make LVM
> >>optional!
> >
> > No, in my understanding LVM typical *features* and behaviour have been removed.
>
> I don't think that's exactly right, Stefano. The way I understand
> it is the installer uses miniLVM, but after installation the full-blown
> LVM is in control of your disk drives, just like in the CPs. But,
> then, I was wrong once before :-) .
No, you are right, I was referring to a "removal" from the setup process. As
mentioned in the full message, the normal LVM can be invoked at any time.