Discussion of development and patch submission.
-
dns2kv2
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Sun 19 Feb, 2017 3:30 am
Post
by dns2kv2 » Sun 17 Sep, 2017 8:51 pm
hello,
another simple patch from me, hope you like it.

-
Attachments
-
- PCem-Epson-PCAX3.patch
- (4.68 KiB) Downloaded 27 times
-
omarsis81
- Posts: 605
- Joined: Thu 17 Dec, 2015 6:20 pm
Post
by omarsis81 » Tue 19 Sep, 2017 5:01 pm
Is this a 386 SX?
Be careful! 386 SX models count memory as KB in the configuration dialog where it should be in MB
-
ecksemmess
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Wed 18 Mar, 2015 5:27 am
Post
by ecksemmess » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 3:15 am
omarsis81 wrote:Is this a 386 SX?
Be careful! 386 SX models count memory as KB in the configuration dialog where it should be in MB
Not familiar with this issue but this sounds important, can you elaborate on where the problem is?
-
omarsis81
- Posts: 605
- Joined: Thu 17 Dec, 2015 6:20 pm
Post
by omarsis81 » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 12:33 pm
Here it is! At first I though it was on all 386 SX models, but it only happens with the AMI clone
It isn't very serious, just a line of code I believe. I'd do it myself but I don't know how to make patches (hg diff in MingW)

- 386sx.jpg (57.15 KiB) Viewed 667 times
-
ecksemmess
- Posts: 148
- Joined: Wed 18 Mar, 2015 5:27 am
Post
by ecksemmess » Wed 20 Sep, 2017 9:01 pm
Are you saying that the number entered is being treated as MB despite being labeled KB? For example, in your screenshot, would PCem improperly attempt to give the system 512 MB of RAM instead of the expected 512 KB? Or are you just saying you find it strange that the AMI 386SX asks for a RAM amount in KB, while most other machines of that class ask for it in MB? If the latter, that's intentional, and there's really no good way around it. The RAM amount has to be in KB in order to make it possible to enter amounts under 1 MB, which that particular machine historically supported. The DTK 386SX does the same thing, for the same reason: it historically supported as little as 512 KB. Those two 386 models were a bit atypical, with most others requiring at least 1 MB. The implementation here shouldn't really be a problem, since it's not like the realistic RAM amount for any machine would ever extend over a wide enough range for a user to confuse KB and MB values. At worst it might strike some users as a bit jarring or inconsistent, but I'm not sure what could be done about that. Perhaps a radio button allowing the user to enter the RAM amount in either KB or MB on all machines?
-
omarsis81
- Posts: 605
- Joined: Thu 17 Dec, 2015 6:20 pm
Post
by omarsis81 » Thu 21 Sep, 2017 1:44 am
In my screenshot it would work as pictured, I just though that for 386 and upper you would always want to enter a value in MB, I wasn't aware of those atypical motherboards.
I really love your radio button idea on all machines!