Thanks for the dictionary definition, but I think you missed the point here. mTCP != WATTCP, and I have no interest in WATTCP. WATTCP is a library and a set of programs from many contributors while mTCP is all my work. Being compatible with something that I originally had no knowledge of an no interest in is not a reasonable expectation. Except for the 32 bit version I generally find the WATTCP based apps to be horribly out of date and wildy varying in quality, which is why I keep writing my own versions.
Others have provided small utilities to let WATTCP apps use the mTCP DHCP program. I think that is a reasonable solution given the history. On a more positive note (which I think we all need) reinventing the wheel is fun. Competition is part of a healthy ecosystem. We're all scratching some sort of itch by continuing to use DOS and do retro programming. Next up for mTCP - IPv6, a lighter/smaller web server, and a Telnet BBS. The Telnet BBS was the actual origins of the whole project; I wrote my Netcat, Telnet client and FTP client as proofs of concept that got a bit out of hand. One day I'm going to get back to the BBS, which exists but needs to be rewritten - I've learned a lot in the last 10 years. I'm also thinking about a network drive for DOS. EtherFlop is intriguing but I really want to go with something over UDP so that it is routable on a network and can be hosted on the server side by a Windows or a Linux machine. While my x86 assembly language is reasonable in small doses I'm still working my way up to TSRs, which are a lot harder to debug than the C programs I've been writing. (And I might not go the TSR route. A shell would be fine except for the extra memory consumption.) -Mike
_______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
