AREV 2.1 CITRIX 1.7 Expanded Menory (AREV Specific)
At 19 FEB 1998 06:11:05PM Bob Gallagher wrote:
I have a client who is running an AREV 2.1 app on a citrix
server. The only problem so far is that no one at citrix
seems to know how to configure the system to make expanded
memory available to the system (i.e., what is that analog
for running CONFIG.NT with device=c:\emm386.exe etc).
Pariculars are AREV 2.1, CITRIX 1.7 & WINDOWS NT 3.51.
Thanks
At 20 FEB 1998 08:21AM Aaron Kaplan wrote:
In cruising around the Citrix site, I found that you would load the session just like an NT session, so there is a CONFIG.NT and PIF which would be loaded and used.
This Citrix document might help with ARev issues while this doc should help with Citrix and DOS apps.
All part of the special service you get with Sprezzatura.
apk@sprezzatura.com
At 25 FEB 1998 11:39PM Tom Bolt wrote:
There is a twist if you use WinFrame over the Novell Gateway:
you can use a PIF to manage memory, and then lose your record locking– or use an icon calling a BAT file, and lose your memory
management. At least this is the dilemma that our in-house
experts (we shall remain nameless) have left us with.
We use Arev 3.12 and the all-networks driver on a Novell 3.12 server (with the NLM), accessed by a standard WinFrame 1.6 server. Has anyone else faced this lose-lose proposition and won?
At 26 FEB 1998 08:45AM Aaron Kaplan wrote:
I'm not a Citrix expert (and no, I've never played one on TV) but
We use Arev 3.12 and the all-networks driver on a Novell 3.12 server (with the NLM), accessed by a standard WinFrame 1.6 server
The NLM won't work with the all-networks driver. It needs the IPX driver and the LHIPXTSR. This could be part of the problem.
apk@sprezzatura.com
At 26 FEB 1998 10:34PM Tom Bolt wrote:
Shows how good my memory is… I checked at the office today, and hoped I'd get a chance to correct myself before you did. You are right, we are using the Novell driver. (You get 10 points)
We are building an NT environment as well, and do not have this problem with the NPP all-networks driver and Service Pack 1.1 accessed from the same WinFrame server used for Novell. We don't use WinFrame all that much (yet), but this memory/locking trade-off could be the factor that accelerates Novell out the door.
At 27 FEB 1998 09:15AM Aaron Kaplan wrote:
So, the PIF gives you memory, but no locking.
The batch file gives locking, but no memory.
Does the PIF call the same batch file?
Could it be that the PIF is not loading the TSR?
You should be able to do this. If I were a betting man, I'd say that the PIF is not set up correctly or that you need some updates on the networking stuff, new client shells and that sorta thing.
apk@sprezzatura.com
At 02 MAR 1998 11:56PM Tom Bolt wrote:
My hunch has always been that something could be done.
However, I am out of my depth.
For example, I am not certain which TSR you are talking about.
(The batch question is easy; no, the pif does not call the batch. We have had some decent pif people look at that part, and I pretty sure we are OK there)
The shells. This would be updates or something to try to scrounge from the Netware site? Are you thinking we have to upgrade from 3.12? (Good chance you are right on the updates. Say it ain't so for the upgrade).
At 04 MAR 1998 08:16AM Aaron Kaplan wrote:
You must load LHIPXTSR somehow in the session. Unless you're loading it up at initial logon (which is strongly recommended you NOT do, you have to load it in the PIF. I'd suggest creating a PIF that loads the TSR with the /P option, fires up ARev, then unloads the TSR.
apk@sprezzatura.com
At 04 MAR 1998 09:33PM Tom Bolt wrote:
Gotcha. All that happens in the background on the Citrix server as far as I can tell–somewhere behind the NW Gateway services. I'll not take up your time further with this issue at the moment. We'd have to work with the propellerheads responsible for the Citrix server…. and we wouldn't want to do that.
We're already moving to NT. Thanks for the help anyway.
(and all this about loaded HIPSTRS, firing up spLIFs, takes my mind off the essentials)
(maybe we should keep this conversation up, I was looking forward to seeing the response titles loop off the right side of the page–guess they'd start showing up in somebody else's discussion, right?)
At 05 MAR 1998 03:20PM Ilona Iguana wrote:
If it's an on-going conversion you want, an on-going conversation you'll get. There's nothing us iguanas like to do more than talk, well, eat and scurry about, but boy do we love to talk.
So, anything special you want to talk about, or should I bring Cameron Chameleon in to help change the color of the conversation?
Ilona Iguana