Hi Jerome, Eric!
On Friday, March 27, 2020 1:16 PM, Jerome Shidel jer...@shidel.net wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> I took a quick look.
> There is some minor confusion and package issues and they cannot be replace
> the current packages “AS-IS”.
> At a glance…
> Are they all newer than the ones already in the repo?
Since the author did not assign explicit version numbers, I had been generating
version numbers based on the date of the most recent modification in the change
log section of the readme file. However, since some changes were to the
documentation only and did not affect the code, this resulted in a newer
version number than the existing package despite the included binary being
identical. I had listed the "makeshift" versions on my site, but not to the
individual LSM files in hopes I could dig up some "real" final version numbers
somewhere. These issues have all been fixed in the versions I uploaded today -
all versions listed are pulled directly from the binaries themselves, the LSM
files have been modified accordingly, and I also updated the descriptions of
the packages to further indicate the differences between my packages and any
existing ones on the ibiblio list.
> For example…, RDISK shows no version in package, web page says 2011-04-25.
> Repo version is 2015-03-05.
Can one of you point me to the existing RDisk package (and XMgr too, if one
exists)? I only found SRDisk on the ibiblio list.
> HIMEMX contains two EXE versions? Why?
According to the readme: "Currently there are 2 versions of HimemX supplied,
HimemX and HimemX2. HimemX2 uses a different strategy when it comes to extended
memory block allocations."
> Where is the License file that was in previous versions?
Japheth no longer includes it, instead he added a License section to the readme
file.
> All packages extract sources to the SOURCE path. This is a problem if the
> user selects install sources. For example, both UHDD and UIDE contain a
> SOURCE\CC.ASM file. This will collide and cause package installation to fail
> with FDNPKG and FDINST.
I see that could be problematic, even if they are the same file. I could
separate CC into its own package, perhaps. Any thoughts from you guys on
whether or not that's an appropriate way to handle this issue?
> Some other docs seem to be missing. Like UIDE\UIDE.TXT. (may no longer be
> needed, IDK)
This file was not included in the driver pack from which I split off the
individual packages, but the existing readme has its own collection of
technical notes. From that I conclude it no longer applies to the current
version.
> Unfortunately, I don’t have the spare time to dedicate to carefully go over,
> verify and adjust them at present.
No problem, I understand how time-consuming this can be!
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
