Hi All,
As a user for whom 2 kernels were modified, I just wanted to add to the
current conversation.
With regard to the official kernel, even as one who uses quite obscure DOS
programs, the compatibility is remarkable. I now only have one program that
I cannot run on FreeDOS.
When I first learned of the recent FreeDOS update in September, I was at
first disappointed with the blank slate "do it yourself" installation
method. I had to install, re-install, then install 1.0 and the previous 1.1
to see the differences, etc.
Finally (3 weeks later), I achieved a successful installation with various
configurations and it was very rewarding. By the first week of October, I
had managed to create a modified setup disk for myself which initiates the
hd and sets the path structure for FDNPKG to function without a hitch. The
only thing I would like to see is a wildcard method (especially for BASE).
But even as it is, I can go from format to a full installation in about and
hour and 15 minutes with breaks. After a while it gets to be fun!
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Rugxulo <rugx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm probably not the best person to answer these questions, but since
> nobody else responded ....
>
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Vidók Tibor <tibor.vi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've just installed FreeDOS to learn a DOS kernel architecture and the
> > project activities.
> > Actually what I cannot see clearly is the followings
> >
> > I have the SVN source tree, which is stopping at kernel 2041 and not
> changed
> > any more.
>
> FreeDOS is an extremely small group of people, probably no more than
> ten people with SVN commit privileges. It's very low maintenance. At
> this point, people just have more important things to do (apparently),
> and it's considered "good enough" to not need major changes.
>
> > But the mail below is about kernel 2042 which seems to be an
> > unofficial build and fixes a very old CP/M incompatibility bug in its own
> > unofficial git repository. Is there any plan to include such fixes in
> > official FreeDOS as well? Or is this 2042 also an official release?
>
> No, AFAIK, Jeremy's unofficial Git repo is just for his local
> experiments. I don't know what it would take to make a formal kernel
> release for 2042. I don't know what testing or cleanups would be
> necessary. Unfortunately, as you've seen, most other kernel developers
> haven't had much time to work on it lately.
>
> > Also SVN contains "install" for package handling from disksets, while the
> > 1.1 installer contains fdupdate (which is obsolate) and fdpkg. The de
> facto
> > official program is fdnpkg now, but, the official 1.1 distribution
> cannot
> > be upgraded with it, since the .lst filenames of installed packages are
> in a
> > pkgx.lst format and incompatible. As a result 1.1 install CD is not
> > recommended to use, thus there is no valid official distribution exists.
>
> 1.1 is still available for download as official. Forks and separate
> distributions are always welcome. But most people aren't interested in
> doing all that work.
>
> As nice as it is to have a pre-made distro, it's a lot of work.
> Certainly FDNPKG is nice, but if plain vanilla FD 1.1 isn't good
> enough for you, you'll just have to make do with manual upgrades (or
> use Mateusz's unofficial .iso).
>
> That brings up another point: packages / .ZIPs. If you want to help
> make some additional or newer packages, then contact Mateusz and/or
> Jim Hall directly.
>
> But once again, motivation is low, and volunteers are few. FreeDOS
> doesn't have the luxury of thousands of people helping, sadly. It's
> actually quite hard to keep track of all the tiny pieces.
>
> > So how a user can locate or identify what is the official (conforming to
> > JHall) freedos distribution?
>
> http://www.freedos.org/download/
> http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.1/
>
> > Is there any plan to release a FreeDOS-1.1.1 or FreeDOS-1.2 with the
> updated
> > kernel and fixed package installer? Maybe with fdnpkg?
>
> Not unless somebody steps up to do the work. I'm not comfortable with
> creating an .iso and fully testing it, so it probably won't be me.
> Quite honestly, some things change too fast to constantly update.
>
> I know it's not ideal, but I still think manually updating is your
> best bet. (I also think emulators are useful, but that too requires
> lots of testing.) Believe it or not, most people who download DOS
> should already know what they're doing.
>
> > Thank you for your clarification in advance,
> > Tibi
>
> Sorry if that's not what you want to hear.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
> from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
> with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
> Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
