> On Oct 26, 2015, at 12:23 PM, Eric Auer <e.a...@jpberlin.de> wrote: > > > Hi Mercury, > >> Personally I would rather see an executable installer also and save any >> batch installers for a floppy distro, A batch would be perfect for a >> setting where every byte counts. > > Actually no: Easiest would be a floppy with pre-installed DOS and > the usual tools (fdisk, format, sys, xcopy). Next step would be to > add UNZIP and have zipped tools. Gives you more installable stuff > per size on the floppy, but less useable stuff without install ;-) > > Size wise, a small executable with few features is probably even > smaller than a medium size set of generic tools and several large > batch files to give the limited language of BAT enough power for > a decent installer. Plus you have to load all those small files, > probably repeatedly, so a small exe is also FASTER for floppies.
Actually, since the boot disk loads uses floppy caching, the FDI runs reasonably well. As a user, you would not even notice any performance difference between it and a binary based installer. The slowest part of the install is waiting for (xcopy or zip, depending on what method is selected) to make a backup of the old OS and waiting for the packages to be extracted. These would be no faster in a exe installer. So, batch speed really is not an issue. :) > >> But this is Jim's project and what Jim wants, Jim gets. lol :) > > This also depends on availability of people who want to implement it. > > Cheers, Eric > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Freedos-devel mailing list > Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
