FP DOS 2.6, Build Compact, Stand Alone, Extended? 
Author Message
 FP DOS 2.6, Build Compact, Stand Alone, Extended?

When building a FoxPro for dos 2.6 application there are 3 three options:
Compact, Stand Alone, And Stand Alone Extended. What is the difference
between these options? I notice that the EXE size changes dramatically.

Thanks
Steve



Fri, 06 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 FP DOS 2.6, Build Compact, Stand Alone, Extended?

Bob,

Thanks, Just a follow up if you don't mind.

Does the Compact version use XMS, EMS memory or just conventional?

From your message, the standalone only uses conventional. Does the
standalone extended use both/either XMS or EMS?

I noticed that you have you do not give you email address. I am getting
swamped with spam, did you notice a drop off since you have not been
publishing you email address or did you get a new ID and not publish?

Thanks again,
Steve

Quote:

>x-no-archive: yes


>> When building a FoxPro for dos 2.6 application there are 3 three options:
>> Compact, Stand Alone, And Stand Alone Extended. What is the difference
>> between these options? I notice that the EXE size changes dramatically.

>The compact option builds an EXE that requires the presence of the
>FoxPro runtime librarys in order to run.  The advantage is the compact
>EXE is much smaller and multiple EXE's can share the same runtime
>libraries, thus saving disk space.

>The stand alone EXE puts the runtime libraries right in the EXE and
>therefore it is much larger.  I can think of no advantage to this
>method, other than people seem to want one monolithic EXE for some
>reason.  There is no difference between this and the compact EXE except
>the way it looks on disk.

>The stand alone extended EXE builds an extended version (as opposed to
>standard) that, like the extended version of interactive FoxPro, will
>utilize XMS memory, is usually faster (not always though, depending on
>hardware) than the standard version of FoxPro, and will not run on a
>286.

>--
>Bob Ruple




Sat, 07 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 FP DOS 2.6, Build Compact, Stand Alone, Extended?



[ Courtesy cc'ed through e-mail to the quoted author ]
[ Reformatted to adhere to Usenet quoting standard and for clarity ]

Quote:


>>> When building a FoxPro for dos 2.6 application there are 3 three options:
>>> Compact, Stand Alone, And Stand Alone Extended. What is the difference
>>> between these options? I notice that the EXE size changes dramatically.

>>The compact option builds an EXE that requires the presence of the
>>FoxPro runtime librarys in order to run.  The advantage is the compact
>>EXE is much smaller and multiple EXE's can share the same runtime
>>libraries, thus saving disk space.

>>The stand alone EXE puts the runtime libraries right in the EXE and
>>therefore it is much larger.  I can think of no advantage to this
>>method, other than people seem to want one monolithic EXE for some
>>reason.  There is no difference between this and the compact EXE except
>>the way it looks on disk.

>>The stand alone extended EXE builds an extended version (as opposed to
>>standard) that, like the extended version of interactive FoxPro, will
>>utilize XMS memory, is usually faster (not always though, depending on
>>hardware) than the standard version of FoxPro, and will not run on a
>>286.
>Bob,

>Thanks, Just a follow up if you don't mind.

I'm not Bob, but I can answer ;-)

Quote:
>Does the Compact version use XMS, EMS memory or just conventional?

Both - depending on computer configuration and availability of the libraries
(.ESL/.ESO).  It is described under "FoxPro Loader" in docs/help.

Quote:
>From your message, the standalone only uses conventional. Does the
>standalone extended use both/either XMS or EMS?

There are two stand-alones: standard (generated by selecting "Stand-alone") and
extended (generated by selecting "Stand-alone Extended").  The first one uses
only conventional and EMS if available; the second will use XMS or EMS,
whichever available.

Quote:
>I noticed that you have you do not give you email address. I am getting
>swamped with spam, did you notice a drop off since you have not been
>publishing you email address or did you get a new ID and not publish?

I did.

[ When replying, remove *'s from address ]
Alexandre Pechtchanski, Systems Manager, RUH, NY



Sat, 07 Oct 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 3 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. 2.6/DOS: Cannot Build Stand-Alone EXE

2. 2.6 Dos Build Executable or Build Executable Extended

3. Stand-Alone Extended BUG!

4. Building a stand alone EXE in VFP 6.0

5. Stand Alone Application Fox2.5 DOS

6. Creating stand-alone app in FoxPro 2.6/Mac

7. Unable to build EXE in FP DOS 2.6

8. FP Dos 2.6 Help with error in app build

9. transporting report from FP 2.6 for DOS to FP 2.6 for Windows

10. spawning LARGE dos apps from extended FP 2.5?

11. Extended select, FP 2.6

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software