Can't get my dos app to run locally with pervasive's workgroup engine

Can't get my dos app to run locally with pervasive's workgroup engine

Post by Jaff » Sat, 16 Nov 2002 04:44:09



I have a dos application that runs using btrieve and Pervasive
Workgroup Engine.  I know this works fine when running over a server.
I am trying to get it to work locally on one machine to use for
training purposes but i cannot get the application to open.  I am
using BTRBox95 and then starting up BDOSSTUB in the dos window.  It is
telling me that is cannot open a file because it is not indexed.  I am
wondering if there is an issue with the Pervasive Workgroup Engine
when running on a windows machine using Btrieve.
I am new to this so please excuse my ignorance.  Any help would be
greatly appreciated.

thanx,

John F.

 
 
 

Can't get my dos app to run locally with pervasive's workgroup engine

Post by LHarve » Sat, 16 Nov 2002 14:28:14


It sounds like you are doing it correctly.

Does the application work with btrbox95 at all, e.g. client server?
It is possible the application is passing in a value that was ignored
by the DOS based breq*.exe requester, but now has meaning to the
btrbox95 requester.

Running the application in client server mode and looking at a
microkernel trace may tell the story.  Specifically look for a
non-zero key value passed on the open, specifically 6 or higher.
-1, -2 and -4 were the only documented valid values.

Leonard


Quote:>I have a dos application that runs using btrieve and Pervasive
>Workgroup Engine.  I know this works fine when running over a server.
>I am trying to get it to work locally on one machine to use for
>training purposes but i cannot get the application to open.  I am
>using BTRBox95 and then starting up BDOSSTUB in the dos window.  It is
>telling me that is cannot open a file because it is not indexed.  I am
>wondering if there is an issue with the Pervasive Workgroup Engine
>when running on a windows machine using Btrieve.
>I am new to this so please excuse my ignorance.  Any help would be
>greatly appreciated.

>thanx,

>John F.