Ah. I see.

Question: Could SAPUCDEX be altered somehow to support most of the original MSCDEX's command-line switches, where appropriate?

Nicht Sehr Gut wrote:

I would guess that there has been since DosBox is using Sapucdex for CD-ROM access and I'm sure adjustments would have been needed for DosBox.

No sapudex sources used.

We wrote our own emulation.

Schadenfreude wrote:

Ah. I see.

Question: Could SAPUCDEX be altered somehow to support most of the original MSCDEX's command-line switches, where appropriate?

My question for Sapu still stands, though.

Originally posted by Qbix No sapudex sources used. We wrote our own emulation.

Well I guess that someone told me wrong then...
This reply on the DosBox messageboard...
http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread … forum_id=174313 and another (which I can't find anymore) led me to believe it was coming from Sapu.

I shouldn't be surprised. There were no ID's on those posts and considering the kind of replies I got to my question here:
http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread … forum_id=174313

The source was posted on the DOSBox board by Stiletto I think. I'll post it up here as soon as it's confirmed everything is 'kosher'.

Nicht Sehr Gut wrote:

I shouldn't be surprised. There were no ID's on those posts and considering the kind of replies I got to my question here:
http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread … forum_id=174313

At least you didn't get heckled and flamed and insulted like I did for reporting performance issues that you confirmed for me on here. I'm really disillusioned about DosBox as a result of my experiences with it and trying to get help with it 🙁

Wha? Where were you flamed?

http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread … forum_id=178546

I don't want to get too off-topic though 😜

Hm. Nice guy. Hopefully he'll end up with a metal rod sticking out of the back of his head. (Err, sorry. Long day.)

Originally posted by HunterZ http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread … forum_id=178546

In the future, you always want to specify that you already tried the basic options when you ask a generic question like this. Otherwise, everyone will presume that you haven't read the basic documentation.

Having said that, there's little excuse for that response (maybe it was that time of the month...). Since they've stopped allowing anonymous posts, useless posts will probably dwindle.

Funny, both of those points had already occured to me 😜 Note that when I gave additional info, people started insulting my computer instead of me, which was hardly any better.

Originally posted by HunterZ Funny, both of those points had already occured to me 😜

🙄
Everyone's a comedian...

Note that when I gave additional info, people started insulting my computer instead of me, which was hardly any better.

After the first flame, it's always too late.

HunterZ j00r computer sux0rz. HEY CHEATER HOW DID U KILL ME WITH UR POS CPU? LPB! LPB! LPB! 😉

*pretends to be snover* No trolling! This thread has been RESOLVED! *closes thread* 😜

Nicht Sehr Gut wrote:

In the future, you always want to specify that you already tried the basic options when you ask a generic question like this. Otherwise, everyone will presume that you haven't read the basic documentation.

Having said that, there's little excuse for that response (maybe it was that time of the month...). Since they've stopped allowing anonymous posts, useless posts will probably dwindle.

Yeah that was the reason to disallow it. I got fed up with both anonymous posting stupid questions and other people flaming those people.

Schadenfreude wrote:

My question for Sapu still stands, though.

I asked my friend Stiletto, Stiletto asked Sapu and replies:

About mscdex command-line switches, i haven't implemented any similar thing because on sapucdex they aren't really needed. But […]
Show full quote

About mscdex command-line switches, i haven't implemented any similar thing because on sapucdex they aren't really needed.

But let me explain it better.
Mscdex uses the following switches:
/D specify the signature of the cdrom driver (the .sys loaded on config.sys, not present on NT)
/E use EMS instead of conventional DOS memory for buffers
/K enable Kanji support
/S enable cdrom drive sharing on network systems
/V show memory usage on startup
/L specify cdrom first drive letter
/M specify how many sector buffers to allocate for reading
About driver selection (/D, /L) and sharing (/S): they have no sense on NT's based systems (the cdrom is handled from the O.S. itself like all the other drives)
About memory (/E, /V, /M): on NTVDM drivers, the data is always inside the NTVDM section of the drive, and never in the DOS memory area
About Kanji (/K): i never seen a japanese cdrom, if you known about one, let le known. Neverthless, Kanji support is present and (maybe) functional, and is selectionable thru the MSCDEX command: INT 2F AX=150E (GET/SET VOLUME DESCRIPTOR PREFERENCE) (see Ralf Brown Interrupt list for the
details).

As you see, there are no 'special' switches that needs to be emulated.

Common sense! I should have thought it more. But, for anyone who asks this question in the future. 😁

Probably should be included in a FAQ or somesuch.

There probably should BE an FAQ or somesuch. 😁

NEVER, I repeat, NEVER mention something like "this should go into a FAQ" when there is no FAQ.
You'll only get nomianted to write one.
(that's how I became the Documents/FAQ writer of Exult)

I'm already going to be writing shitloads of stuff from Deep Thought and also other things that need to be written, like instructions for DOSBox.