Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!jarthur!polyslo!jdudeck
From: jdudeck@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (John R. Dudeck)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: DOS 4.01 and SHARE.EXE
Summary: You probably need it for large partitions
Keywords: DOS 4.01 Share
Message-ID: <25cdc295.3d1c@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>
Date: 5 Feb 90 18:14:45 GMT
References: <25ccd167.2d5d@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> <6307@cps3xx.UUCP>
Reply-To: jdudeck@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (John R. Dudeck)
Organization: Cal Poly State University -- San Luis Obispo
Lines: 21


In article <6307@cps3xx.UUCP> gcook@cps3xx.UUCP (Greg Cook) writes:
>From article <25ccd167.2d5d@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>, by jdudeck@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (John R. Dudeck):
>> I have an 80 mb disk, and DOS 4.01, and have never loaded share.  So far
>> I have had no problems.  The purpose of share is supposed to be to support
>> file and record locking in a multiuser situation.
> 

I may have spoken too soon.  Now it is true that I have not put the SHARE
command into my AUTOEXEC.BAT file.  But yesterday I downloaded SYSID47 from
chyde.uwasa.fi, and when I ran it, it told me that SHARE was loaded!  Looking
in my DOS manual, it says, "Share is automatically loaded if you have a
hard disk which is greater than 32 megabytes in a single partition".  So
apparently, if you have a disk > 32 mb but with no partitions > 32 mb, DOS
just warns you, but doesn't do anything.  If you have a partition > 32 mb,
it loads SHARE whether you like it or not.

Somewhere on the net I vaguely recall seeing some guru from Microsoft
explaining why you need Share for large partitions.  I didn't really follow
what he said, but probably it is better to leave well enough alone, and
not try to disable Share for large partitions!

-- 
John Dudeck                           "You want to read the code closely..." 
jdudeck@Polyslo.CalPoly.Edu             -- C. Staley, in OS course, teaching 
ESL: 62013975 Tel: 805-545-9549          Tanenbaum's MINIX operating system.