Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!arunc
From: arunc@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: MKS Toolkit questions
Message-ID: <45900237@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 29 May 89 21:16:00 GMT
References: <1283@esunix.UUCP>
Lines: 59
Nf-ID: #R:esunix.UUCP:1283:uxe.cso.uiuc.edu:45900237:000:2939
Nf-From: uxe.cso.uiuc.edu!arunc    May 29 16:16:00 1989


>>1) I believe that command.com is replaced by some other shell.  How big
>>   is it?  (My concern here is of course the 640k memory restriction on
>>   dos.)  Can it reside in epanded memory, which I don't have but am
>>   considering getting?

command.com doesn't have to be replaced, although it can by replaced by
MKS's version of the Korn shell.  As yet, their shell can't be placed in
expanded memory.  As for how much space it takes up, that depends upon
how much space you allow it to have, how many aliases you have, whether
you want to be able to "suspend" a vi job and return to DOS, etc.  I
believe the minimum that it requires is 70K, though I might be wrong on
that.

>>2) Does something need to be done to run canned dos programs; i.e. does
>>   command.com need to be reinstalled or something?  I guess I'm very
>>   fuzzy on how MKS Toolkit relates to BIOS, etc.

No, nothing has to be done to run "canned" DOS programs.  I regularly
use WordPerfect, Procomm, Kermit, DBaseIII, PC-Paint, with no problems.

If your program has to load up an additional version of command.com in
order to run another DOS program (for example, if I want to edit a
DBaseIII program file with vi rather than the DBase built-in editor)
THEN (and only in such analogous situations) you might run into a
problem, as the calling program has to have itself loaded, a version of
command.com loaded, PLUS the program you want to run.

>>3) The bottom line is: will it run at an 'acceptable' speed on my AT&T
>>   PC6300 (an 8086 based 8 Mhz XT like machine)?  I do have a hard disk
>>   (who doesn't?) but it's not terribly fast.  I'm posting this article
>>   so that I don't get a sales pitch to this question.  No doubt Mortice
>>   Kern would tell me it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, even
>>   on my lowly machine.

I've used the Toolkit on an AT&T 6300+ for the past year and a half.
The machine is not fast (I think it's about the same speed as yours).
Loading up the Korn shell below command.com does slow things down, but
the slow down is marginal.  And yes, it is the greatest thing since
sliced bread, it's toasted bread with hot butter and strawberry jam! :) :)

>>I am looking for any information from people who actually use or have
>>tried the MKS Toolkit.  Post or e-mail as you see fit.  Thanks in
>>advance,
>>
>>Keith Rogers  UUCP: utah-cs!esunix!krogers, or you might try
>>                    uplherc!esunix!krogers 

I think the product is great, and the people who make it have responded
in a friendly and intelligent manner to any questions I've posed them.
I've written numerous shell scripts, using MKS's ksh, awk, sed, fgrep,
etc., and they've all run well.  They required only small modifications
in order to run in a BSD UNIX or Sys5V3 environment, the changes mostly
having to do with syntactical differences.

Buy the MKS Toolkit, and keep those people in business!

	Arun Chandra
	arunc@uiucuxe.CSO.UIUC.EDU