BS>> Okay, the current mecca thing does only work on private 
 BS>> messages.. BTW Did you look into the MEX source, I did 
 BS>> look in there several times, but couldn't find the 
 BS>> problem.. AFAIR is the problem then it tries to store a 
 BS>> adress in a array there looks to small to me...

 BJ> I haven't dug that far into it.  Based on the error messages I've 
 BJ> seen, I believe there is definately a starting address not being 
 BJ> calculated and stored in the MEX compiled code.  

 BS> Hmm.. My bet is also that it's using "dynamic memory allocations".

I would expect that also.  We might be getting bit by different memory
allocation scheems betwen OS/2 / Win32 and Linux, but it would more likely
be a difference between Watcom and GCC.....  And it might be that the OS/2
code is adjusting a segment address and GCC / Linux may be wanting a
non-segemented address....  Or we could be getting bit by a big vs little
endian issue in calculating the memory pointer.....  Just some ideas for
consideration....

 BJ> Since Wes was 
 BJ> working on this (and having "fun" trying to find the
bug), I haven't 
 BJ> spent much time on this issue -- yet.....

 BS> Okay.. But I don't have a clue of then Wesley would be 
 BS> back.. My patience is not so big as it has been :/

Unforuantely, due to the amount of time I have for this, I have the needed
patience....  I'm barely getting around to repling to the echo mail at this
point in time.....

 BS>> But QWK upload doesn't work well :( 

 BJ> Try local console (bin/max -k) mode.  If I remember correctly, this 
 BJ> gets around the problem with file transfers and will allow you to 
 BJ> test out .QWK format without the file transfer code working.  

 BS> The file upload doesn't work at all1

Ok.  I haven't tested this idea.....  

 BJ> Only thought is an off-line mail reader and running .qwk format from 
 BJ> the local console mode to possibly do this right now....  Ok, or 
 BJ> something running against the squish (or *.msg) file areas directly 
 BJ> -- like MSGED.

 BS> That's what I'm using now, but I would presuiate if I 
 BS> could be comfortable by using Maximus for message 
 BS> editing.

Using local mode (bin/max -k) works for using the Max full screen editor
for replying.  There are some control charcater issues that still can bite,
and the lack of mex stuff bites in seeing some of the menu stuff.....  I'm
still primarily using my OS/2 BBS for replies......

Take care.....

Bob Jones, 1:343/41



--- Maximus/2 3.01