David O'Shea schreef:
It says "The UNSTABLE (aka development) branch is what I refer to as the
development kernel (kernels with w suffix)." It looks like those kernels
actually have ".dev" or ".dbgdev" in them, right?
There doesn't seem to be a discussion of the naming convention for FreeCOM.
well, we have:
kernel 2034, 2035 released by Bart
kernel 2035A released by Jeremy
kernel 2035B by Jeremy (2035A + "stable features backported from 2035W)
kernel 2035W by Jeremy, experimental/development line
FreeCOM 0.82, 0.82patchlevel 1, 0.82pl2, 0.82pl3 by Steffen Kaiser
flavour 1: XMS-swapping, 8086+
flavour 2: KSSF-swapping, 8086+
FreeCOM 0.84prerelease (CVS) by Jeremy
flavour 1: XMS-swapping, 8086+, no LH, no ALIAS
flavour 2: XMS-swapping, 80186+, full-featured
flavour 3: KSSF-swapping, 8086+, full-featured, no binary available.
I take it from the fact that we group the stable and development
kernel/freecom/sys separately that you should only use a stable kernel with
a stable freecom and a development kernel with a development freecom. Is
this correct? Maybe we shoudl say it explicitly. We should probably also
say that you can mix development and debug development files (at least I
assume that that is correct).
Everything may be mixed. What I'm afraid of is 80186+/80386+ binaries
which somehow end up being transferred to older machines
(8086). Then it might not work (kernel for example). That's why
8086-kernel and 8086-FreeCOM are provided by default.
Only (major!) drawback to that is no LH functionality in FreeCOM.
Bernd
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Freedos-kernel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
