Tony Pater,
20-Apr-98 10:59:47, Tony Pater wrote to Andy Roberts
          Subject: 4os2 and AdeptXbbs ?
 AR>> I don't remember the details.  I do recall seeing someone else's
 AR>> AdeptXBBS setup that did use 4OS2 and that would not work for me.
 AR>> I think I also tried some CMD file that was written especially
 AR>> for 4OS2 and that did not work either.  It may be that 4OS2 does
 AR>> all the normal REXX stuff fine.  But Adept has it's own version
 AR>> of AdeptREXX.  And I think if I started relying on 4OS2 it would
 AR>> be hard for me to write REXX to give to others for use on
 AR>> machines without 4OS2.  There was also something about having to
 AR>> unload 4OS2 before doing certain things (perhaps FixPacks ???).
 AR>> As it is I am and probably always will be a novice at REXX, even
 AR>> tho some of my CMD files ar almost 30K not including comments.
 AR>> It is hard enough for me to try to figure out why some of my CMD
 AR>> files don't do exactly what I want, without having to unload 4OS2
 AR>> or memorize the little differences with or without 4OS2.  Maybe
 AR>> when I have more time I will experiment with 4OS2.  But I would
 AR>> rather IBM solve this 1 little problem.
 TP> Hhhhhmmmmm..... Andy/Kenneth, I've been using 4dos and 4os2
 TP> for years (well 4os2 since 1994 when I moved to OS/2 2.x).
 TP> I've also setup and been using AdeptXbbs (private), since it
 TP> came out (.9x beta days) with 4os2, nary a blip.
 TP> Never had a conflict/problem using it seamlessly with Rexx.
Seems to me all my excuses have been refuted from left, right and
down under, except time and money.
 TP> Only thing to remember is to invoke the 'cmd.exe' shell when
 TP> installing some OS/2 programmes - this isn't necessarily the
 TP> authors faults, (though some should know better), as assigning
 TP> "aliases"/history logs/secondary shell parms/etc., more or less
 TP> mandates a prudent switch to bog-standard 'cmd.exe' for
 TP> installations.
I think it was the secondary shell or call to AdeptXBBS mail.cmd
that was odd.
 TP> It is not a problem with 4os2 per se ... like OS/2, it's extensive
 TP> ability to be tailored has to be born in mind when used with some
 TP> programmes..... if one is familiar with 4dos/4os2 and OS/2 it
 TP> ain't a problem.
Well my learning curve for OS/2 has not leveled off yet, even tho
I've been using it since v.1.3.  I suppose it is my total lack of
being "familiar with 4dos/4os2" that makes me wonder about problems
I might encounter when experimenting.
     Thanks and Good Luck,        Andy Roberts
                                  andy@shentel.net
--- Terminate 5.00/Pro*at 
---------------