home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- id m0uBCni-0007s4a; Sun, 21 Apr 96 22:00 MDT
- Sender: owner-executor
- Received: by ftp.ardi.com (Smail3.1.29.1 #3)
- id m0uBCdm-0007s8C; Sun, 21 Apr 96 21:50 MDT
- Received: (from dmh@localhost) by cnct.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA16034; Sun, 21 Apr 1996 23:57:54 -0400
- Mime-version: 1.0
- Message-id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960421235609.15478A-100000@cnct.com>
- Subject: Re: Windows95-Executor/DOS multitasking
- Cc: executor@ardi.com
- Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
- In-reply-to: <01I3TAHTALXE00DZIZ@DEPAUW.EDU>
- To: NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED <DECLARKG@DEPAUW.EDU>
- Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 23:57:53 -0400 (EDT)
- From: Dave <dmh@cnct.com>
- Sender: owner-executor@ardi.com
- Precedence: bulk
-
- On Sun, 21 Apr 1996, NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED wrote:
-
- > Dear All,
- >
- > A while back, I asked if anyone had succeeded in getting multiple sessions
- > of Executor to run in Windows 95. I was just wondering if I should interpret
- > the silence as a "no"?
-
- Correct me if I'm wrong (anyone?) but I beleive that Executor is designed
- to be have only one occurance running per cpu at any given time.
-
- Dave
- dmh@cnct.com
- <A HREF="http://www.cnct.com/home/dmh">My homepage</A>
- finger for pgp key.
-
-
-