Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
I agree, and I wrote about similar ideas a while back in consideration of what we might want in 2.0 http://sourceforge.net/userapps/wordpress/jhall1/2009/04/ I like the ideas of USB driver and a __GOOD__ GUI (no Linux). Anyway, this thread degenerated ... stared with DOS drivers and ended with DOG-EMU only 62 posts later :-( EOD -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
If you have several DOSEMUs running in parallel, these cannot communicate. Linux, however, allows one process to spawn another process and then there is pipe() to have these processes communicate. A tiny Linux distribution without X and graphics is here: http://www.ttylinux.net/ Georg-- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
my 2cents: I spent a lot of time with MicroCore Linux. It runs very well, and probably would run Dosemu. BUT the problemis that it is not a *real* Linux ditro in the sense that is does not install to a harddisk, it rather boots every time as if it was from a cdrom. There are a few tricks to include what you have bade into next boot, but it is complex and not automatable... So I abandoned it... As for using memory, there is no problem using more than 66Mb of ram in Dosemu, it provides good memory drivers. Alain Em 18-09-2011 16:13, Rugxulo escreveu: Hi, 2011/9/18 Aitor Santamaríaaitor...@gmail.com: 2011/9/13 Jim Halljh...@freedos.org: In DOS, it would be awesome to have true multitasking Pick the smallest Linux distribution that you know. These days that would probably be MicroCore (aka, TinyCore w/o X11) Linux. It's about a 7 MB .ISO download. I think the RAM usage is pretty low. I haven't tested DOSEMU, but I think nowadays you need Glibc 2.2, kernel 2.6, etc. (which it has, IIRC). So you can't just randomly pick any old Linux, sadly. http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/welcome.html Some people have suggested Debian in the past as a good stable starting point. But I remember DeLi 0.7.2 (uclibc-based) had a DOSEMU package, and that's been resurrected as ConnochaetOS (though I haven't tested it yet): http://www.connochaetos.org/wiki/ Remove X and anything about graphics. Yes but easier said than done. Remove any Unix stuff, I guess you mean all the unnecessary POSIX tools. At least substituting Busybox should cover a good deal of it. The barebones stuff is kernel (vmlinuz), initrd.gz, and root system (/bin/sh) etc. (I think), and Gujin is a good boot loader (with DOS version), meant to replace Loadlin / Lilo. Wouldn't it be great that you'd have several FreeDOSes running simultaneously? (switch with Ctrl+Alt+Fn). Well, yes, that would be the whole point. But here's a naive question: can a single DOSEMU session use more than 64 MB of memory? (Newer GCCs really eat a lot.) You wouldn't have the problem of modern hardware (Linux does the part), but then you have quite other disadvantages (I don't know how good would be the drive mapping process that DOSEMU does. Would be nice if DOSEMU scanned all the disks and mapped ALL partitions automatically). Well, the only disadvantage isn't really one at all: it's not perfect (but no DOS environment, or any OS, is). So there are bugs and incompatibilities, just like anything. But overall it works quite well. In the meantime, yes, at least task switching would be great. Old-style real mode stuff should be easy to swap in and out of memory. (I remember some old swappers from 80xxx snippets, but I don't know how stable they were.) I imagine that it's when you start adding ten bazillion memory managers that things get complex. http://www.filegate.net/pdnasm/ The real problem is trying to determine what apps you want to run. Personally I'd prefer DJGPP (cmdline, textmode) stuff and similar, but even that is probably a bit too complex for a simple memory swapper. Though of course DOSEMU handles DPMI fine. P.S. Actually at one time I wanted to build pcemu under (DOS) Minix 2.04 to be able to fake multitasking, but ACK didn't like the stock sources, and I never fiddled with it further. http://pcemu.sourceforge.net/ http://www.minix3.org/previous-versions/Intel-2.0.4/ -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Alain Mouette ala...@pobox.com wrote: my 2cents: I spent a lot of time with MicroCore Linux. It runs very well, and probably would run Dosemu. BUT the problemis that it is not a *real* Linux ditro in the sense that is does not install to a harddisk, it rather boots every time as if it was from a cdrom. There are a few tricks to include what you have bade into next boot, but it is complex and not automatable... So I abandoned it... Hmmm. I read similar but never tried (yet). There are installation instructions on the webpage, but again, it's not super simple and easy. PuppyLinux has .sfs files and optionally saves all your changes into a separate file, but of course it's a much bigger distro (130 MB nowadays). But it's easy to boot via mini Gujin via FreeDOS (I tried it once) if you put vmlinuz + initrd.gz on the FAT partition first. That's probably the easiest way (that I know of, so far) to run DOSEMU, but again, not ideal since it uses more RAM and disk than I'd like. (Heh, I'd rather not have to spend a year or two learning Linux From Scratch [LFS] just to make a lite Linux just to boot DOSEMU w/ FreeDOS.) As for using memory, there is no problem using more than 66Mb of ram in Dosemu, it provides good memory drivers. Are you sure? IIRC, it starts out with only 20 MB DPMI available, which is too low for latest DJGPP w/ GCC 4.6.1. I ended up copying + editing ~/.dosemurc to increase to 64 MB (e.g. to rebuild Gautier's 3D Engine w/ GNAT). Beyond that amount I didn't test. -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, 2011/9/11 jhall jh...@freedos.org: There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.) inherently useless Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. I used to use this feature all the time as a student: for example, to run a word processor and spreadsheet program as separate tasks. I think I usually had a command.com shell in there too. That let me write up my data analysis for labs much faster, because I could quickly jump back to the spreadsheet or my own analysis program to look at results, then describe it using the word processor. I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. Me too! I fear about hardware status, thought it should be feasible for regular programs. Aitor -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, 2011/9/11 Bernd Blaauw bbla...@home.nl: Not sure about FDSHELL's abilities. I'd love for someone to come up with a decent DOSSHELL.INI for it, including a usable/pretty color scheme. It can already jump to DOS, same for EDIT Annotated as feature request. (regrettably, don't expect it soon). Aitor -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, 2011/9/13 Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org: In DOS, it would be awesome to have true multitasking, where you can let a process run in the background (like a compile) while you do something else (browser?) But to be honest, all I really want/need is some sort of extension or shell that provides task-switching, rather than true multitasking. There would be a way, but would require someone to find out if it is feasible and work about it. I haven't done it myself, although I was tempted to try out. Pick the smallest Linux distribution that you know. Remove X and anything about graphics. Remove any Unix stuff, and configure init to have several virtual consoles boot the text-mode of DOSEMU (instead of any unix-style terminal), in which you put FreeDOS. Wouldn't it be great that you'd have several FreeDOSes running simultaneously? (switch with Ctrl+Alt+Fn). You wouldn't have the problem of modern hardware (Linux does the part), but then you have quite other disadvantages (I don't know how good would be the drive mapping process that DOSEMU does. Would be nice if DOSEMU scanned all the disks and mapped ALL partitions automatically). In the meantime, yes, at least task switching would be great. Aitor -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, 2011/9/18 Aitor Santamaría aitor...@gmail.com: 2011/9/13 Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org: In DOS, it would be awesome to have true multitasking Pick the smallest Linux distribution that you know. These days that would probably be MicroCore (aka, TinyCore w/o X11) Linux. It's about a 7 MB .ISO download. I think the RAM usage is pretty low. I haven't tested DOSEMU, but I think nowadays you need Glibc 2.2, kernel 2.6, etc. (which it has, IIRC). So you can't just randomly pick any old Linux, sadly. http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/welcome.html Some people have suggested Debian in the past as a good stable starting point. But I remember DeLi 0.7.2 (uclibc-based) had a DOSEMU package, and that's been resurrected as ConnochaetOS (though I haven't tested it yet): http://www.connochaetos.org/wiki/ Remove X and anything about graphics. Yes but easier said than done. Remove any Unix stuff, I guess you mean all the unnecessary POSIX tools. At least substituting Busybox should cover a good deal of it. The barebones stuff is kernel (vmlinuz), initrd.gz, and root system (/bin/sh) etc. (I think), and Gujin is a good boot loader (with DOS version), meant to replace Loadlin / Lilo. Wouldn't it be great that you'd have several FreeDOSes running simultaneously? (switch with Ctrl+Alt+Fn). Well, yes, that would be the whole point. But here's a naive question: can a single DOSEMU session use more than 64 MB of memory? (Newer GCCs really eat a lot.) You wouldn't have the problem of modern hardware (Linux does the part), but then you have quite other disadvantages (I don't know how good would be the drive mapping process that DOSEMU does. Would be nice if DOSEMU scanned all the disks and mapped ALL partitions automatically). Well, the only disadvantage isn't really one at all: it's not perfect (but no DOS environment, or any OS, is). So there are bugs and incompatibilities, just like anything. But overall it works quite well. In the meantime, yes, at least task switching would be great. Old-style real mode stuff should be easy to swap in and out of memory. (I remember some old swappers from 80xxx snippets, but I don't know how stable they were.) I imagine that it's when you start adding ten bazillion memory managers that things get complex. http://www.filegate.net/pdnasm/ The real problem is trying to determine what apps you want to run. Personally I'd prefer DJGPP (cmdline, textmode) stuff and similar, but even that is probably a bit too complex for a simple memory swapper. Though of course DOSEMU handles DPMI fine. P.S. Actually at one time I wanted to build pcemu under (DOS) Minix 2.04 to be able to fake multitasking, but ACK didn't like the stock sources, and I never fiddled with it further. http://pcemu.sourceforge.net/ http://www.minix3.org/previous-versions/Intel-2.0.4/ -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi Rugxulo, You introduction really made me wanting to try out DOSEMU. It's unfortunate that I allocated all my hard disk space (120GB) of my computer to Windows, so the option would be limited to a Virtual Machine. Thus I'll try your idea, with DeLi + DOSEMU inside VMware or Virtual Box. Thank you for your idea. Best regards, Robbie (Decheng) Fan On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 3:13 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 2011/9/18 Aitor Santamaría aitor...@gmail.com: 2011/9/13 Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org: In DOS, it would be awesome to have true multitasking Pick the smallest Linux distribution that you know. These days that would probably be MicroCore (aka, TinyCore w/o X11) Linux. It's about a 7 MB .ISO download. I think the RAM usage is pretty low. I haven't tested DOSEMU, but I think nowadays you need Glibc 2.2, kernel 2.6, etc. (which it has, IIRC). So you can't just randomly pick any old Linux, sadly. http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/welcome.html Some people have suggested Debian in the past as a good stable starting point. But I remember DeLi 0.7.2 (uclibc-based) had a DOSEMU package, and that's been resurrected as ConnochaetOS (though I haven't tested it yet): http://www.connochaetos.org/wiki/ Remove X and anything about graphics. Yes but easier said than done. Remove any Unix stuff, I guess you mean all the unnecessary POSIX tools. At least substituting Busybox should cover a good deal of it. The barebones stuff is kernel (vmlinuz), initrd.gz, and root system (/bin/sh) etc. (I think), and Gujin is a good boot loader (with DOS version), meant to replace Loadlin / Lilo. Wouldn't it be great that you'd have several FreeDOSes running simultaneously? (switch with Ctrl+Alt+Fn). Well, yes, that would be the whole point. But here's a naive question: can a single DOSEMU session use more than 64 MB of memory? (Newer GCCs really eat a lot.) You wouldn't have the problem of modern hardware (Linux does the part), but then you have quite other disadvantages (I don't know how good would be the drive mapping process that DOSEMU does. Would be nice if DOSEMU scanned all the disks and mapped ALL partitions automatically). Well, the only disadvantage isn't really one at all: it's not perfect (but no DOS environment, or any OS, is). So there are bugs and incompatibilities, just like anything. But overall it works quite well. In the meantime, yes, at least task switching would be great. Old-style real mode stuff should be easy to swap in and out of memory. (I remember some old swappers from 80xxx snippets, but I don't know how stable they were.) I imagine that it's when you start adding ten bazillion memory managers that things get complex. http://www.filegate.net/pdnasm/ The real problem is trying to determine what apps you want to run. Personally I'd prefer DJGPP (cmdline, textmode) stuff and similar, but even that is probably a bit too complex for a simple memory swapper. Though of course DOSEMU handles DPMI fine. P.S. Actually at one time I wanted to build pcemu under (DOS) Minix 2.04 to be able to fake multitasking, but ACK didn't like the stock sources, and I never fiddled with it further. http://pcemu.sourceforge.net/ http://www.minix3.org/previous-versions/Intel-2.0.4/ -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Decheng Fan fandech...@gmail.com wrote: You introduction really made me wanting to try out DOSEMU. It's unfortunate that I allocated all my hard disk space (120GB) of my computer to Windows, Vista and 7 let you resize the NTFS partition. With XP you may have to use (external) GParted (on a Linux liveCD), which is a little tricker. Then ideally you'd maybe (?) use EasyBCD to configure the Windows bootloader (as I don't think GRUB cooperates very well, at least IMHO). so the option would be limited to a Virtual Machine. Thus I'll try your idea, with DeLi + DOSEMU inside VMware or Virtual Box. Thank you for your idea. It's certainly safer / easier to install in VM but perhaps slower and buggier (depending). Well, Connochaet (sp?) is based upon ArchLinux now, so perhaps it's more compatible than even old DeLi was. I just know that DeLi (esp. before the Unicode-aware 0.8.0) was very very light on RAM. Of course, who knows, perhaps uclibc had bugs re: DOSEMU anyways, dunno. :-/ But MicroCore might work too, and personally I'd probably try that first. (My other PC uses Lucid PuppyLinux, partially Ubuntu compatible, and DOSEMU works fine there. But it's not super ultra minimal, it's got X11 and other stuff, totals about 130 MB.) Anyways, I dunno, sometimes things work, sometimes they don't. You never know until you try. That's all part of the fun (and frustration) with computers. ;-) -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi Rugxulo, On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Vista and 7 let you resize the NTFS partition. With XP you may have to use (external) GParted (on a Linux liveCD), which is a little tricker. Then ideally you'd maybe (?) use EasyBCD to configure the Windows bootloader (as I don't think GRUB cooperates very well, at least IMHO). Thanks for this good idea. I'll try that. so the option would be limited to a Virtual Machine. Thus I'll try your idea, with DeLi + DOSEMU inside VMware or Virtual Box. Thank you for your idea. It's certainly safer / easier to install in VM but perhaps slower and buggier (depending). Yes, I still want to do this. To try run in VM and if it works fine then it should be fine on physical hardware. Well, Connochaet (sp?) is based upon ArchLinux now, so perhaps it's more compatible than even old DeLi was. I just know that DeLi (esp. before the Unicode-aware 0.8.0) was very very light on RAM. Of course, who knows, perhaps uclibc had bugs re: DOSEMU anyways, dunno. :-/ But MicroCore might work too, and personally I'd probably try that first. (My other PC uses Lucid PuppyLinux, partially Ubuntu compatible, and DOSEMU works fine there. But it's not super ultra minimal, it's got X11 and other stuff, totals about 130 MB.) Anyways, I dunno, sometimes things work, sometimes they don't. You never know until you try. That's all part of the fun (and frustration) with computers. ;-) Nice recommendations. I'll try DeLi first, because I'm not so much a Linux power user. Best regards, Robbie -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
I am getting timeouts on that server. both web server and ftp server are dead. Status: Waiting to retry... Status: Resolving address of ftp.sysdev.org Status: Connecting to :21... Status: Connection attempt failed with ETIMEDOUT - Connection attempt timed out. Error: Could not connect to server is there a web site? all I can find is VMIX the video mixer. it costs $32. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:KkuCkcCv87oJ:ftp://ftp.sysdev.org/pub/VMiX/vmixread.txt+vmix-86cd=3hl=enct=clnkgl=usclient=firefox-a From: Ralf A. Quint free...@gmx.net To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 7:18 PM Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers At 11:46 AM 9/13/2011, jhall wrote: I emailed the contact person of VMiX yesterday, to see if he might be interested in opening VMiX as open source software. clicking on the [download] button leads to ftp://ftp.sysdev.org/pub/VMiX-3/ so it's possible no one is working on VMiX anymore. If they would be willing to open VMiX under the GNU GPL, I'd love to see us add VMiX to a future release of FreeDOS. it's GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE. how much more o you expect ? That's interesting! The file I read on their site said shareware, so I didn't look further. Maybe I was looking at an old file. I'll look at this again. Only the BABy part (Basic ABstraction Layer) tool/library is under LGPL, the rest is still marked as shareware... Ralf -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
At 11:14 AM 9/17/2011, Jim Michaels wrote: I am getting timeouts on that server. both web server and ftp server are dead. Yeah, looks like they closed the FTP server... is there a web site? all I can find is VMIX the video mixer. Could it possibly cross your mind to try sysdev.org? :? Ralf -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
you are right, I am wrong. I've been wrong before. somehow I thought someone had said the project was on sourceforge. (sf.net) many projects on sf.net also have their own regular web sites. From: Ralf A. Quint free...@gmx.net To: Jim Michaels jmich...@yahoo.com; freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 7:46 PM Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers At 06:44 PM 9/15/2011, Jim Michaels wrote: uh-oh - it shouldn't be on sf.net if it's shareware. that's a violation of the terms of service. you might want to dig further into that with the authors, because some people think the word shareware means freeware. so you might want to see if they are actually charging a fee for the product or not. If they are, then they are violating the terms of service and it is actually shareware. if they are not, you should probably help them by telling them what the definition of shareware is. What the heck are you talking about? How do you come to think they are on SourceForge? Ralf -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers - multithreading
I may have made a mistake about seeing some pthreads in one compiler... found out native threads are threads given by the OS. so never mind. From: Jim Michaels jmich...@yahoo.com To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2011 12:47 AM Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers I could see multithreading support in 7-zip. but then again files aren't usually very big in DOS. I don't know if OpenWATCOM or DJGPP has support for POSIX threads. C++ is getting a makeover by the way, it is getting native STL support for threads if I understand correctly. I should double-check the specs for TR1 and TR2 to see if it's in those places, or if it's in the language spec. If nothing else, GCC is getting a makeover. From: Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 12:27 PM Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers Hi :-) In fact , i running arachne with older pcmcia 11 mb drivers for wifi, BUT i can't use new pcmcia card wifi up to 54 and more MB .. Wireless is a pain in DOS, yes, sorry. Impossible also using wifi pen See above, unfortunately. But some network cable. or usb external device like printers / Georg / Bret drivers should work. If your printer still does not work then, it is probably cheapo GDI but slightly better printers accept PostScript or PDF - hopefully also good old plain text. Even for GDI it might be possible to convert your print data to something that the printer can use under DOS :-) scanners or bluetooth... People still use scanners? I thought they used their photocamera, then even the BIOS often supports your SD cardreader in DOS without any drivers... ;-) As for bluetooth, what apart from mobile phone headsets uses that at the moment? I guess it could also be used for wireless data transfer to mobile phones or printers, but luckily both also have USB ports :-) How many time we can continue use dos with OLDER hardware? DOS runs fine on my very modern hardware, thank you. Even Linux boots in a fraction of a minute, not one hour as dos386 suggests. DOS works great supporting my parallel printer, floppy, SATA DVD drive etc but you are right that USB3 drivers are not freeware in DOS and no drivers for hardware-accelerated FullHD movie playback with surround sound over HDMI exist: In short, DOS does not NEED new hardware... But then, I do not think we want to follow the Windows example where people are actually worried that 2 GB will not be enough RAM to write a letter in MS Office... ;-) I mean when your DOS EMM64 will support 16 GB of RAM, where do you find DOS software needing that? Maybe a Commander Keen with support for holographic screens? Would be cool, I guess. And would need multi CPU and SLI accel graphics and NCQ, which all *are* not DOS. Eric -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
the intel processor manuals are at: http://www.intel.com/design/corei7ee/documentation.htm programming 3a section 7.6 is of specific interest, as it contains stuff about multicore and multithreaded programming for IA-32 procs. From: Travis Siegel tsie...@softcon.com To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 5:55 PM Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:36 PM, jhall wrote: There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.) inherently useless Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. I used to use this feature all the time as a student: for example, to run a word processor and spreadsheet program as separate tasks. I think I usually had a command.com shell in there too. That let me write up my data analysis for labs much faster, because I could quickly jump back to the spreadsheet or my own analysis program to look at results, then describe it using the word processor. I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. There's always vmix, it's pretty good, and actually does true multitasking. Last I saw, it was trying to become an os in it's own right, where it could be used as a dos replacement. I don't think this got very far, but if I recall correctly, it is on sourceforge, or something similar. That program worked so well, my screen reader would read all the active windows simultaneously, which really reaked havoc with understanding what was going on, but it did work, and worked very well. :) Perhaps freedos could talk to the vmix folks, and ask them to release code to the 2.67 version, so we could include it into freedos as it's own shell, or something similar (or was the latest 2.87, I forget) It may be worth a try though. -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
I also think the task should look exactly like DOS. This either means that resources (e.g. serial ports, printer ports, usb, ect) must be given exclusively to one task which owns it until it closes or the kernal must administer the conflicts WITHOUT one task being able to crash another. Writing a multitasker is easy, but I have no understanding about how DPMI, rings and resource allocation work. I think the idea of a bare-bone linux behind the scene is a very good. Truth be told I would like to see OS/2 resurrected with true DOS windows. Andreas On 12/9/2011 23:24, Michael B. Brutman wrote: I have been thinking about what a more modern DOS would look like. Some ideas ... - A task would look a lot like a single instance of DOS running today. The address space of a task would look the same, so it would have the interrupt table, BIOS area, video display buffer, expansion ROMs, system ROM, and extended memory that you find on a DOS system today. (Kind of like a running instance of DOSBox, but with better device and hardware emulation.) - MS DOS has its own concept of process, which is an instance of a running executable. That concept remains unchanged. Multiple processes live within a task (as defined above) just as they do today. - The DOS kernel supports most (if not all) of the standard DOS functions. As there is an interrupt table and system ROM, BIOS functions are available as well. - Multiple tasks could be started and running. But they are logically part of one machine and one OS, not just separate instances of an emulator. The underlying kernel is a bit more sophisticated: - There is a shared filesystem for the machine. If that filesystem is not FAT then it is made to look like FAT by the time the DOS function calls run. - Memory mapping is used so that the tasks exist in different address spaces, and thus are protected against each other. Memory mapping is also used to give the illusion that each copy has its own video buffer so that direct screen writes and other normal practices are not problems. - The DOS portion of the operating system that is visible to the user applications is a thin wrapper that calls into the real OS. That keeps the memory footprint of the DOS kernel in each task minimal. - There is a real networking stack that can be used, and is shared across the entire machine. Additional DOS function calls are defined to use it, or a packet driver used a shim is used to support existing applications. - The kernel provides some other services that we are missing, like cut n paste support between the different tasks and inter-process communication. Another way to look at this is that you have a real operating system like Linux with a new (or better) DOS emulator. The DOS emulator takes some pain to try to emulate a real machine; keyboard interrupts, timer tick interrupts, 8250 and 16550 device emulation, etc. The difference is that unlike running multiple instances of DOSBox in separate Linux processes, the emulator allows some sharing of common state and data between the different emulated DOS tasks. I can't see adding all of this (or even 1/10th of it) to FreeDOS. But I can see starting with a fairly stripped down Linux base and doing some hardcore development work with KVM to build this. Riding on top of Linux takes care of our hardware compatibility problems and the emulator should preserve most of our existing software base. Mike -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Andreas Berger wrote: Writing a multitasker is easy, but I have no understanding about how DPMI, rings and resource allocation work. I think the idea of a bare-bone linux behind the scene is a very good. Truth be told I would like to see OS/2 resurrected with true DOS windows. A free OS/2 clone would really be nice. And the DOS personality could be implemented by FreeDOS code (plus the OS/2 side of the DOS command stuff in c:\os2). -uso. -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Mike, I like your suggestions. One thing that always bothered me about dos versions that have come out since ms dropped the ball is their complete lack of inovation. I realize there's only so much that can be done if you're intending to keep 100 percent compatibility, but still, it's not hard to imagine such details as enumerated here. One thing I wonder is why nobody builds a dos multitasker that simply spawns a new virtual 386 machine for each new dos task. That would keep 100 percent compatibility, and still allow complete and free multitasking. The virtual 386 machines would take care of virtualizing keyboards and video output automatically, since it's all built into the 386 hardware. I'm fairly certain, none of that ability has been removed with the newer cores and such. I see no reason why this sort of thing couldn't work. I'm not positive, but I think this is the approach vmix386 took, and why it worked so well (at least with my testing) it would be fantastic to have such an os. Another thing I wonder, is why it is that nobody has built anything that allows executing of multiple oses on a single computer, using one cpu core for each os, thereby allowing each os to run natively on it's own cpu, thus eliminating the need to vertualize anything (except perhaps output and input), but then each and every os would have it's own cpu, and all of them would run at full native speeds. Then you could have as many oses running as you have cpu cores to handle them. (still waiting) I guess someone will do it eventually, but until they do, I'll stick with my osx machine, and my several dos boxes scattered everywhere. :) -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Travis Siegel wrote: Mike, I like your suggestions. One thing that always bothered me about dos versions that have come out since ms dropped the ball is their complete lack of inovation. I realize there's only so much that can be done if you're intending to keep 100 percent compatibility, but still, it's not hard to imagine such details as enumerated here. The last real innovation in DOS was with 3.3 back in 1987. Really everything since was taken from somewhere else, often from Digital Research or Norton. One thing I wonder is why nobody builds a dos multitasker that simply spawns a new virtual 386 machine for each new dos task. That would keep 100 percent compatibility, and still allow complete and free multitasking. The virtual 386 machines would take care of virtualizing keyboards and video output automatically, since it's all built into the 386 hardware. I'm fairly certain, none of that ability has been removed with the newer cores and such. I see no reason why this sort of thing couldn't work. I'm not positive, but I think this is the approach vmix386 took, and why it worked so well (at least with my testing) it would be fantastic to have such an os. Definitely. And even Windows 3.x's DOS boxes prove that this can be done. Another thing I wonder, is why it is that nobody has built anything that allows executing of multiple oses on a single computer, using one cpu core for each os, thereby allowing each os to run natively on it's own cpu, thus eliminating the need to vertualize anything (except perhaps output and input), but then each and every os would have it's own cpu, and all of them would run at full native speeds. Then you could have as many oses running as you have cpu cores to handle them. I thought vmware's esx could do that? -uso. -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On 9/14/2011 7:31 AM, Travis Siegel wrote: Mike, I like your suggestions. One thing that always bothered me about dos versions that have come out since ms dropped the ball is their complete lack of inovation. I realize there's only so much that can be done if you're intending to keep 100 percent compatibility, but still, it's not hard to imagine such details as enumerated here. One thing I wonder is why nobody builds a dos multitasker that simply spawns a new virtual 386 machine for each new dos task. That would keep 100 percent compatibility, and still allow complete and free multitasking. The virtual 386 machines would take care of virtualizing keyboards and video output automatically, since it's all built into the 386 hardware. I'm fairly certain, none of that ability has been removed with the newer cores and such. I see no reason why this sort of thing couldn't work. I'm not positive, but I think this is the approach vmix386 took, and why it worked so well (at least with my testing) it would be fantastic to have such an os. What I suggested earlier can be implemented using the virtual 386 mode. The difference is that instead of running several virtual 386s independently, the DOS kernel within the virtual 386 can coordinate/share resources with other DOS kernels running concurrently. This gives the illusion of true multitasking in DOS while keeping separate hardware resources so that the ill-behaved programs we love so much can still touch all of the hardware and memory in their address space. The other, more modern alternative is to use KVM/QEMU and the hardware support built into the more recent x86 processors. This setup is used by other virtualization environments, and KVM/QEMU have the advantage that the guest OS (our DOS kernel) can do magic syscalls to ask for an assist from the host OS (Linux). It allows us to move a lot of the DOS kernel into KVM/QEMU where you have a much better programming environment (Linux), resources, etc. Another thing I wonder, is why it is that nobody has built anything that allows executing of multiple oses on a single computer, using one cpu core for each os, thereby allowing each os to run natively on it's own cpu, thus eliminating the need to vertualize anything (except perhaps output and input), but then each and every os would have it's own cpu, and all of them would run at full native speeds. Then you could have as many oses running as you have cpu cores to handle them. (still waiting) I guess someone will do it eventually, but until they do, I'll stick with my osx machine, and my several dos boxes scattered everywhere. :) I'm sure somebody does that, but that is more of hard partitioning scheme than a virtualization scheme. PowerPC machines can do that (LPAR) as do large IBM mainframes. Mike -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
There was a project, quite some time ago, it was called LiDos. I liked the idea very much: It was a very simple Linux distro runing Dosemu at boot time. You could switch to a bare Linux console and use Linux Commands. Unfortunatly it was Slackware based and had too many modifications, so when the original author abandoned nobody was able to continue. We could make something similar, based on something more main-line like Debian... I am willing to help, but I don't know how to setup a minimum Linux BUT with the capability of detecting all possible Hardware... I am already working on a VM with a Debian+Lxde to run Dosemu with some predifined configurations like networking and charsets. Alain Em 14-09-2011 04:05, Andreas Berger escreveu: I also think the task should look exactly like DOS. This either means that resources (e.g. serial ports, printer ports, usb, ect) must be given exclusively to one task which owns it until it closes or the kernal must administer the conflicts WITHOUT one task being able to crash another. Writing a multitasker is easy, but I have no understanding about how DPMI, rings and resource allocation work. I think the idea of a bare-bone linux behind the scene is a very good. Truth be told I would like to see OS/2 resurrected with true DOS windows. Andreas On 12/9/2011 23:24, Michael B. Brutman wrote: I have been thinking about what a more modern DOS would look like. Some ideas ... - A task would look a lot like a single instance of DOS running today. The address space of a task would look the same, so it would have the interrupt table, BIOS area, video display buffer, expansion ROMs, system ROM, and extended memory that you find on a DOS system today. (Kind of like a running instance of DOSBox, but with better device and hardware emulation.) - MS DOS has its own concept of process, which is an instance of a running executable. That concept remains unchanged. Multiple processes live within a task (as defined above) just as they do today. - The DOS kernel supports most (if not all) of the standard DOS functions. As there is an interrupt table and system ROM, BIOS functions are available as well. - Multiple tasks could be started and running. But they are logically part of one machine and one OS, not just separate instances of an emulator. The underlying kernel is a bit more sophisticated: - There is a shared filesystem for the machine. If that filesystem is not FAT then it is made to look like FAT by the time the DOS function calls run. - Memory mapping is used so that the tasks exist in different address spaces, and thus are protected against each other. Memory mapping is also used to give the illusion that each copy has its own video buffer so that direct screen writes and other normal practices are not problems. - The DOS portion of the operating system that is visible to the user applications is a thin wrapper that calls into the real OS. That keeps the memory footprint of the DOS kernel in each task minimal. - There is a real networking stack that can be used, and is shared across the entire machine. Additional DOS function calls are defined to use it, or a packet driver used a shim is used to support existing applications. - The kernel provides some other services that we are missing, like cut n paste support between the different tasks and inter-process communication. Another way to look at this is that you have a real operating system like Linux with a new (or better) DOS emulator. The DOS emulator takes some pain to try to emulate a real machine; keyboard interrupts, timer tick interrupts, 8250 and 16550 device emulation, etc. The difference is that unlike running multiple instances of DOSBox in separate Linux processes, the emulator allows some sharing of common state and data between the different emulated DOS tasks. I can't see adding all of this (or even 1/10th of it) to FreeDOS. But I can see starting with a fairly stripped down Linux base and doing some hardcore development work with KVM to build this. Riding on top of Linux takes care of our hardware compatibility problems and the emulator should preserve most of our existing software base. Mike -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Steve Nickolas lyricalnan...@usotsuki.hoshinet.org wrote: On Wed, 14 Sep 2011, Andreas Berger wrote: Writing a multitasker is easy, but I have no understanding about how DPMI, rings and resource allocation work. I think the idea of a bare-bone linux behind the scene is a very good. Truth be told I would like to see OS/2 resurrected with true DOS windows. A free OS/2 clone would really be nice. And the DOS personality could be implemented by FreeDOS code (plus the OS/2 side of the DOS command stuff in c:\os2). -uso. -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel Really fills the open source market. I mean, FreeDOS fills the DOS position, ReactOS maps on to the NT, and then another project for OS/2. Maybe... For multitasking, I two situations: 1. do it in real mode. 2. do it in V86 mode. For V86 (virtual 8086) mode, a minimal Linux + DOSEmu sounds the best solution to me, because although it requires a Linux, as we have modern machines with ample RAM (for DOS and a minimal Linux, at least) and ample hard disk space, and these two are ready stuff, there is really no need to bother other solutions. -- Robbie (Decheng) Fan (aka Robbie Mosaic) -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Travis Siegel tsie...@softcon.com wrote: Another thing I wonder, is why it is that nobody has built anything that allows executing of multiple oses on a single computer, using one cpu core for each os, thereby allowing each os to run natively on it's own cpu, thus eliminating the need to vertualize anything (except perhaps output and input), but then each and every os would have it's own cpu, and all of them would run at full native speeds. Then you could have as many oses running as you have cpu cores to handle them. (still waiting) I guess someone will do it eventually, but until they do, I'll stick with my osx machine, and my several dos boxes scattered everywhere. :) For this, I think co-Linux is an example. It runs in parallel with other OS. Although I don't know how it shares resources, whether all through host OS or just partially. -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
I agree, and I wrote about similar ideas a while back in consideration of what we might want in 2.0. http://sourceforge.net/userapps/wordpress/jhall1/2009/04/ An easy way to get there, of course, is by simply using instances of a lightweight VM emulator like DOSemu, on a stripped down version of Linux. An even better way would be to support true multitasking. But I would be thrilled if we provided even task switching, such as through a shell. I emailed the contact person of VMiX yesterday, to see if he might be interested in opening VMiX as open source software. That project hasn't been updated since 2007, so it's possible no one is working on VMiX anymore. If they would be willing to open VMiX under the GNU GPL, I'd love to see us add VMiX to a future release of FreeDOS. But this is all 2.0 talk, and we have yet to get 1.1 out. So I'll table the rest of my thoughts for now. jh On Sep 12, 2011, at 9:24 PM, Michael B. Brutman mbbrut...@brutman.com wrote: I have been thinking about what a more modern DOS would look like. Some ideas ... - A task would look a lot like a single instance of DOS running today. The address space of a task would look the same, so it would have the interrupt table, BIOS area, video display buffer, expansion ROMs, system ROM, and extended memory that you find on a DOS system today. (Kind of like a running instance of DOSBox, but with better device and hardware emulation.) - MS DOS has its own concept of process, which is an instance of a running executable. That concept remains unchanged. Multiple processes live within a task (as defined above) just as they do today. - The DOS kernel supports most (if not all) of the standard DOS functions. As there is an interrupt table and system ROM, BIOS functions are available as well. - Multiple tasks could be started and running. But they are logically part of one machine and one OS, not just separate instances of an emulator. The underlying kernel is a bit more sophisticated: - There is a shared filesystem for the machine. If that filesystem is not FAT then it is made to look like FAT by the time the DOS function calls run. - Memory mapping is used so that the tasks exist in different address spaces, and thus are protected against each other. Memory mapping is also used to give the illusion that each copy has its own video buffer so that direct screen writes and other normal practices are not problems. - The DOS portion of the operating system that is visible to the user applications is a thin wrapper that calls into the real OS. That keeps the memory footprint of the DOS kernel in each task minimal. - There is a real networking stack that can be used, and is shared across the entire machine. Additional DOS function calls are defined to use it, or a packet driver used a shim is used to support existing applications. - The kernel provides some other services that we are missing, like cut n paste support between the different tasks and inter-process communication. Another way to look at this is that you have a real operating system like Linux with a new (or better) DOS emulator. The DOS emulator takes some pain to try to emulate a real machine; keyboard interrupts, timer tick interrupts, 8250 and 16550 device emulation, etc. The difference is that unlike running multiple instances of DOSBox in separate Linux processes, the emulator allows some sharing of common state and data between the different emulated DOS tasks. I can't see adding all of this (or even 1/10th of it) to FreeDOS. But I can see starting with a fairly stripped down Linux base and doing some hardcore development work with KVM to build this. Riding on top of Linux takes care of our hardware compatibility problems and the emulator should preserve most of our existing software base. Mike -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
[VMiX ...] Rugxulo found the link (http://www.sysdev.org/). They aren't on SourceForge, it seems they are shareware instead. I don't know, I didn't look too too closely, esp. since it was confusing. I'm not sure if all versions are shareware or just the newer (2007? beta? 3.x?) ones. There is source code for some of it (!), but I don't know the licensing. I did see an LGPL copying file somewhere, but I don't know if that applied to the whole or not or even something else. In fact I doubt it, esp. since one of their ZIPs had old MS-DOS 5's command.com (and some other tools), ick. So yeah, that's what I meant by murky / annoying / didn't check too closely. Anybody else, feel free to take a closer look and report back to us. But please don't e-mail them and harass them. A simple query might suffice, but they presumably can't handle all of us nagging them to death. I emailed him about it yesterday. jh-- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
An easy way to get there, of course, is by simply using instances of a lightweight VM emulator like DOSemu, on a stripped down version of Linux. An even better way would be to support true multitasking. But I would be thrilled if we provided even task switching, such as through a shell. I emailed the contact person of VMiX yesterday, to see if he might be interested in opening VMiX as open source software. clicking on the [download] button leads to ftp://ftp.sysdev.org/pub/VMiX-3/ That project hasn't been updated since 2007, similar to freedos 1.0, so it's possible that this is dead as well so it's possible no one is working on VMiX anymore. If they would be willing to open VMiX under the GNU GPL, I'd love to see us add VMiX to a future release of FreeDOS. it's GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE. how much more o you expect ? But this is all 2.0 talk, and we have yet to get 1.1 out. So I'll table the rest of my thoughts for now. jh On Sep 12, 2011, at 9:24 PM, Michael B. Brutman mbbrut...@brutman.com wrote: I have been thinking about what a more modern DOS would look like. Some ideas ... - A task would look a lot like a single instance of DOS running today. The address space of a task would look the same, so it would have the interrupt table, BIOS area, video display buffer, expansion ROMs, system ROM, and extended memory that you find on a DOS system today. (Kind of like a running instance of DOSBox, but with better device and hardware emulation.) - MS DOS has its own concept of process, which is an instance of a running executable. That concept remains unchanged. Multiple processes live within a task (as defined above) just as they do today. - The DOS kernel supports most (if not all) of the standard DOS functions. As there is an interrupt table and system ROM, BIOS functions are available as well. - Multiple tasks could be started and running. But they are logically part of one machine and one OS, not just separate instances of an emulator. The underlying kernel is a bit more sophisticated: - There is a shared filesystem for the machine. If that filesystem is not FAT then it is made to look like FAT by the time the DOS function calls run. - Memory mapping is used so that the tasks exist in different address spaces, and thus are protected against each other. Memory mapping is also used to give the illusion that each copy has its own video buffer so that direct screen writes and other normal practices are not problems. - The DOS portion of the operating system that is visible to the user applications is a thin wrapper that calls into the real OS. That keeps the memory footprint of the DOS kernel in each task minimal. - There is a real networking stack that can be used, and is shared across the entire machine. Additional DOS function calls are defined to use it, or a packet driver used a shim is used to support existing applications. - The kernel provides some other services that we are missing, like cut n paste support between the different tasks and inter-process communication. Another way to look at this is that you have a real operating system like Linux with a new (or better) DOS emulator. The DOS emulator takes some pain to try to emulate a real machine; keyboard interrupts, timer tick interrupts, 8250 and 16550 device emulation, etc. The difference is that unlike running multiple instances of DOSBox in separate Linux processes, the emulator allows some sharing of common state and data between the different emulated DOS tasks. I can't see adding all of this (or even 1/10th of it) to FreeDOS. But I can see starting with a fairly stripped down Linux base and doing some hardcore development work with KVM to build this. Riding on top of Linux takes care of our hardware compatibility problems and the emulator should preserve most of our existing software base. Mike -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Le 13/09/2011 15:37, Tom Ehlert a écrit : An easy way to get there, of course, is by simply using instances of a lightweight VM emulator like DOSemu, on a stripped down version of Linux. An even better way would be to support true multitasking. But I would be thrilled if we provided even task switching, such as through a shell. I emailed the contact person of VMiX yesterday, to see if he might be interested in opening VMiX as open source software. clicking on the [download] button leads to ftp://ftp.sysdev.org/pub/VMiX-3/ Oh cool, sources ! I recall testing it briefly and it worked not too bad. IIRC it had some odd GNU-screen-like screen splitting, the vertical one was a bit strange to use though :) That project hasn't been updated since 2007, similar to freedos 1.0, so it's possible that this is dead as well Maybe they'd be willing to open a sourceforge project themselves and take the lead on it ? It seems some files on the FTP were modified this summer, so it's not totally dead. so it's possible no one is working on VMiX anymore. If they would be willing to open VMiX under the GNU GPL, I'd love to see us add VMiX to a future release of FreeDOS. it's GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE. how much more o you expect ? MIT ? :P LGPL is compatible with GPL anyway. François. -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
I emailed the contact person of VMiX yesterday, to see if he might be interested in opening VMiX as open source software. clicking on the [download] button leads to ftp://ftp.sysdev.org/pub/VMiX-3/ so it's possible no one is working on VMiX anymore. If they would be willing to open VMiX under the GNU GPL, I'd love to see us add VMiX to a future release of FreeDOS. it's GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE. how much more o you expect ? That's interesting! The file I read on their site said shareware, so I didn't look further. Maybe I was looking at an old file. I'll look at this again. Thanks, jh-- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
At 11:46 AM 9/13/2011, jhall wrote: I emailed the contact person of VMiX yesterday, to see if he might be interested in opening VMiX as open source software. clicking on the [download] button leads to ftp://ftp.sysdev.org/pub/VMiX-3/ftp://ftp.sysdev.org/pub/VMiX-3/ so it's possible no one is working on VMiX anymore. If they would be willing to open VMiX under the GNU GPL, I'd love to see us add VMiX to a future release of FreeDOS. it's GNU LESSER GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE. how much more o you expect ? That's interesting! The file I read on their site said shareware, so I didn't look further. Maybe I was looking at an old file. I'll look at this again. Only the BABy part (Basic ABstraction Layer) tool/library is under LGPL, the rest is still marked as shareware... Ralf -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
[...] Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. You could also (allegedly) just change your Win3x or Win9x shell= line (system.ini ??) to command.com and use BootGUI=0 (or whatever). Or such. ;-) But that would require using Windows. I try not to use proprietary systems where possible. I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. Of course! I mean, there are advantages to not multitasking (believe it or not) *sometimes*, but most people, myself included, would enjoy being able to compile in the background (or download a file, etc). In DOS, it would be awesome to have true multitasking, where you can let a process run in the background (like a compile) while you do something else (browser?) But to be honest, all I really want/need is some sort of extension or shell that provides task-switching, rather than true multitasking. -jh -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
[...] I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. There's always vmix, it's pretty good, and actually does true multitasking. Last I saw, it was trying to become an os in it's own right, where it could be used as a dos replacement. I don't think this got very far, but if I recall correctly, it is on sourceforge, or something similar. That program worked so well, my screen reader would read all the active windows simultaneously, which really reaked havoc with understanding what was going on, but it did work, and worked very well. :) Perhaps freedos could talk to the vmix folks, and ask them to release code to the 2.67 version, so we could include it into freedos as it's own shell, or something similar (or was the latest 2.87, I forget) It may be worth a try though. I remember using VMiX, long ago. I don't recall having much success with it at the time, and it ran really slow on my '386. Might have been 1992 or 1993, something like that, before I started experimenting with Linux. Rugxulo found the link (http://www.sysdev.org/). They aren't on SourceForge, it seems they are shareware instead. However, VMiX might be worth looking into again. They do multitasking on DOS ... anyone here tried it with FreeDOS? I'll have to give it a go with FreeDOS on bare metal, since a VM would probably not run well (but they do say it supports DOS in Linux DOSEmu.) I'll email the developer and see if he'd be willing to release the code under an open source license. Their last release was 2007, so either the project went stale, or died completely. Might be willing to go open source. -jh -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org wrote: [...] Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. You could also (allegedly) just change your Win3x or Win9x shell= line (system.ini ??) to command.com and use BootGUI=0 (or whatever). Or such. ;-) But that would require using Windows. I try not to use proprietary systems where possible. Right, but since 99% of the world uses Windows (you know what I mean ...), obviously it's not a huge problem to most people (myself included, though I'm clearly on your side, heh). I was just mentioning it for completeness. I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. Of course! I mean, there are advantages to not multitasking (believe it or not) *sometimes*, but most people, myself included, would enjoy being able to compile in the background (or download a file, etc). In DOS, it would be awesome to have true multitasking, where you can let a process run in the background (like a compile) while you do something else (browser?) But to be honest, all I really want/need is some sort of extension or shell that provides task-switching, rather than true multitasking. I agree, but it's hard to do, esp. with so much compatibility to support. I don't see any advantage in breaking the entire API (not that you do, of course), but perhaps minimal incompatibilities could be tolerated (e.g. we lived with half-broken NTVDM without any huge huge complaints). If anybody who is super bored or a whiz in x86 asm and OS development has time, they could check out TriDOS and try to fix it to work (correctly, heh). I would, but I'm fairly certain that I'm too dumb! http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/system/ -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org wrote: I remember using VMiX, long ago. I don't recall having much success with it at the time, and it ran really slow on my '386. Might have been 1992 or 1993, something like that, before I started experimenting with Linux. DR-DOS is fairly good, at least 7.03, e.g. with improved DPMI host (now compatible with DJGPP). Ran okay on my P166, though since the floppy drive broke (again) I haven't messed with it as much. Honestly, though, I rarely felt the pain that would make me want to compile in the background (since due to various factors I didn't often rebuild stuff there), but indeed GCC is a slow bastard, esp. for big projects (and memory hungry too, which indeed could be affected by 64 MB per task limit). In other words, I never majorly needed multitasking there. Honestly, it was more comfortable to use XP, but that's harder to find nowadays (and old cpus break, like mine, eek). Honestly, Windows/NTVDM or Linux/DOSEMU is good (and necessary) for both multitasking and networking. I think those two things are the killer features (though people always whine about 640 kb or segments or LFNs too). Rugxulo found the link (http://www.sysdev.org/). They aren't on SourceForge, it seems they are shareware instead. I don't know, I didn't look too too closely, esp. since it was confusing. I'm not sure if all versions are shareware or just the newer (2007? beta? 3.x?) ones. There is source code for some of it (!), but I don't know the licensing. I did see an LGPL copying file somewhere, but I don't know if that applied to the whole or not or even something else. In fact I doubt it, esp. since one of their ZIPs had old MS-DOS 5's command.com (and some other tools), ick. So yeah, that's what I meant by murky / annoying / didn't check too closely. Anybody else, feel free to take a closer look and report back to us. But please don't e-mail them and harass them. A simple query might suffice, but they presumably can't handle all of us nagging them to death. However, VMiX might be worth looking into again. They do multitasking on DOS ... anyone here tried it with FreeDOS? I'll have to give it a go with FreeDOS on bare metal, since a VM would probably not run well (but they do say it supports DOS in Linux DOSEmu.) I'll email the developer and see if he'd be willing to release the code under an open source license. Their last release was 2007, so either the project went stale, or died completely. Might be willing to go open source. Feel free to do all of those things. I might do so myself too, but more likely I'll procrastinate and forget as it doesn't feel important or likely to succeed. (I start up and never finish too many subprojects, ugh, why??) It would be cool, but I'm not getting my hopes up. I really only responded about some of this (off-topic?) for completeness in case I forget some of it later (likely), esp. since I don't have a firm enough grasp of it or specific experience using most of it. Oh well, still interesting -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
I have been thinking about what a more modern DOS would look like. Some ideas ... - A task would look a lot like a single instance of DOS running today. The address space of a task would look the same, so it would have the interrupt table, BIOS area, video display buffer, expansion ROMs, system ROM, and extended memory that you find on a DOS system today. (Kind of like a running instance of DOSBox, but with better device and hardware emulation.) - MS DOS has its own concept of process, which is an instance of a running executable. That concept remains unchanged. Multiple processes live within a task (as defined above) just as they do today. - The DOS kernel supports most (if not all) of the standard DOS functions. As there is an interrupt table and system ROM, BIOS functions are available as well. - Multiple tasks could be started and running. But they are logically part of one machine and one OS, not just separate instances of an emulator. The underlying kernel is a bit more sophisticated: - There is a shared filesystem for the machine. If that filesystem is not FAT then it is made to look like FAT by the time the DOS function calls run. - Memory mapping is used so that the tasks exist in different address spaces, and thus are protected against each other. Memory mapping is also used to give the illusion that each copy has its own video buffer so that direct screen writes and other normal practices are not problems. - The DOS portion of the operating system that is visible to the user applications is a thin wrapper that calls into the real OS. That keeps the memory footprint of the DOS kernel in each task minimal. - There is a real networking stack that can be used, and is shared across the entire machine. Additional DOS function calls are defined to use it, or a packet driver used a shim is used to support existing applications. - The kernel provides some other services that we are missing, like cut n paste support between the different tasks and inter-process communication. Another way to look at this is that you have a real operating system like Linux with a new (or better) DOS emulator. The DOS emulator takes some pain to try to emulate a real machine; keyboard interrupts, timer tick interrupts, 8250 and 16550 device emulation, etc. The difference is that unlike running multiple instances of DOSBox in separate Linux processes, the emulator allows some sharing of common state and data between the different emulated DOS tasks. I can't see adding all of this (or even 1/10th of it) to FreeDOS. But I can see starting with a fairly stripped down Linux base and doing some hardcore development work with KVM to build this. Riding on top of Linux takes care of our hardware compatibility problems and the emulator should preserve most of our existing software base. Mike -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.) inherently useless Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. I used to use this feature all the time as a student: for example, to run a word processor and spreadsheet program as separate tasks. I think I usually had a command.com shell in there too. That let me write up my data analysis for labs much faster, because I could quickly jump back to the spreadsheet or my own analysis program to look at results, then describe it using the word processor. I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. jh-- Using storage to extend the benefits of virtualization and iSCSI Virtualization increases hardware utilization and delivers a new level of agility. Learn what those decisions are and how to modernize your storage and backup environments for virtualization. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51434361/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Op 11-9-2011 23:36, jhall schreef: There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.) inherently useless Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. Task switching isn't the same as SMP support to benefit from the presence of multiple processor sockets, cores and/or hyperthreading Not sure about FDSHELL's abilities. I'd love for someone to come up with a decent DOSSHELL.INI for it, including a usable/pretty color scheme. It can already jump to DOS, same for EDIT -- Using storage to extend the benefits of virtualization and iSCSI Virtualization increases hardware utilization and delivers a new level of agility. Learn what those decisions are and how to modernize your storage and backup environments for virtualization. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51434361/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:36 PM, jhall wrote: There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.) inherently useless Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. I used to use this feature all the time as a student: for example, to run a word processor and spreadsheet program as separate tasks. I think I usually had a command.com shell in there too. That let me write up my data analysis for labs much faster, because I could quickly jump back to the spreadsheet or my own analysis program to look at results, then describe it using the word processor. I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. There's always vmix, it's pretty good, and actually does true multitasking. Last I saw, it was trying to become an os in it's own right, where it could be used as a dos replacement. I don't think this got very far, but if I recall correctly, it is on sourceforge, or something similar. That program worked so well, my screen reader would read all the active windows simultaneously, which really reaked havoc with understanding what was going on, but it did work, and worked very well. :) Perhaps freedos could talk to the vmix folks, and ask them to release code to the 2.67 version, so we could include it into freedos as it's own shell, or something similar (or was the latest 2.87, I forget) It may be worth a try though. -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
I could see multithreading support in 7-zip. but then again files aren't usually very big in DOS. I don't know if OpenWATCOM or DJGPP has support for POSIX threads. C++ is getting a makeover by the way, it is getting native STL support for threads if I understand correctly. I should double-check the specs for TR1 and TR2 to see if it's in those places, or if it's in the language spec. If nothing else, GCC is getting a makeover. From: Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2011 12:27 PM Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers Hi :-) In fact , i running arachne with older pcmcia 11 mb drivers for wifi, BUT i can't use new pcmcia card wifi up to 54 and more MB .. Wireless is a pain in DOS, yes, sorry. Impossible also using wifi pen See above, unfortunately. But some network cable. or usb external device like printers / Georg / Bret drivers should work. If your printer still does not work then, it is probably cheapo GDI but slightly better printers accept PostScript or PDF - hopefully also good old plain text. Even for GDI it might be possible to convert your print data to something that the printer can use under DOS :-) scanners or bluetooth... People still use scanners? I thought they used their photocamera, then even the BIOS often supports your SD cardreader in DOS without any drivers... ;-) As for bluetooth, what apart from mobile phone headsets uses that at the moment? I guess it could also be used for wireless data transfer to mobile phones or printers, but luckily both also have USB ports :-) How many time we can continue use dos with OLDER hardware? DOS runs fine on my very modern hardware, thank you. Even Linux boots in a fraction of a minute, not one hour as dos386 suggests. DOS works great supporting my parallel printer, floppy, SATA DVD drive etc but you are right that USB3 drivers are not freeware in DOS and no drivers for hardware-accelerated FullHD movie playback with surround sound over HDMI exist: In short, DOS does not NEED new hardware... But then, I do not think we want to follow the Windows example where people are actually worried that 2 GB will not be enough RAM to write a letter in MS Office... ;-) I mean when your DOS EMM64 will support 16 GB of RAM, where do you find DOS software needing that? Maybe a Commander Keen with support for holographic screens? Would be cool, I guess. And would need multi CPU and SLI accel graphics and NCQ, which all *are* not DOS. Eric -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Op 10-9-2011 9:47, Jim Michaels schreef: I could see multithreading support in 7-zip. but then again files aren't usually very big in DOS. I don't know if OpenWATCOM or DJGPP has support for POSIX threads. Programs that are multithreaded either have to implement their own SMP support or rely on the operating system's kernel/architecture to do so. As DOS by default doesn't support SMP, 7zip would have to implement their own DOS support for speaking to multiple processors. I'm not aware of any DOS program accessing multiple processors. Maybe a Distributed.net client, but that's about it. -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Bernd Blaauw bbla...@home.nl wrote: Op 10-9-2011 9:47, Jim Michaels schreef: I could see multithreading support in 7-zip. but then again files aren't usually very big in DOS. I don't know if OpenWATCOM or DJGPP has support for POSIX threads. Programs that are multithreaded either have to implement their own SMP support or rely on the operating system's kernel/architecture to do so. As DOS by default doesn't support SMP, 7zip would have to implement their own DOS support for speaking to multiple processors. I'm not aware of any DOS program accessing multiple processors. Maybe a Distributed.net client, but that's about it. There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.), but most of them I haven't tried. And of course Windows and OS/2 or Linux's DOSEMU sorta count, at least the 32-bit versions. Normal vanilla DOS (API) doesn't have SMP or threading, but some of these variants have their own. (I've never tried RDOS, but it sounds really good. DR-DOS is okay if you can live with the old tools, bugs, and 64 MB per task limitation.) Of course, that doesn't help us, but whatever. ;-) p7zip 9.13 has been ported to DOS via DJGPP. Unlike older versions (used GNU pth), this one uses FSU pthreads (initially written for Ada/GNAT, though ironically latest Ada for DJGPP doesn't support tasks at all, probably because FSU was basically abandoned a long time ago). Unlike GNU pth, you don't need a socket lib (libsocket, Watt-32), so it's easier to use, allegedly. But no, it's not real threads, just faking it so that p7zip compiles (as the p stands for POSIX, which obviously needs a lot more than minimal DOS/DJGPP services to run). HX works with Win32's 7ZA.EXE with (fake) threading, but no SMP support (yet), which is super complicated anyways. Besides, 7-Zip doesn't use much multithreading except to offload some file management, so it doesn't really help that much anyways, not 10x (nor even 2x) at least. Most home computers don't have many cores anyways, and it's hard to properly scale upwards in speed. -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 6:07 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Bernd Blaauw bbla...@home.nl wrote: Op 10-9-2011 9:47, Jim Michaels schreef: I could see multithreading support in 7-zip. but then again files aren't usually very big in DOS. I don't know if OpenWATCOM or DJGPP has support for POSIX threads. Programs that are multithreaded either have to implement their own SMP support or rely on the operating system's kernel/architecture to do so. As DOS by default doesn't support SMP, 7zip would have to implement their own DOS support for speaking to multiple processors. I'm not aware of any DOS program accessing multiple processors. Maybe a Distributed.net client, but that's about it. There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.), but most of them I haven't tried. And of course Windows and OS/2 or Linux's DOSEMU sorta count, at least the 32-bit versions. Normal vanilla DOS (API) doesn't have SMP or threading, but some of these variants have their own. (I've never tried RDOS, but it sounds really good. DR-DOS is okay if you can live with the old tools, bugs, and 64 MB per task limitation.) Of course, that doesn't help us, but whatever. ;-) p7zip 9.13 has been ported to DOS via DJGPP. Unlike older versions (used GNU pth), this one uses FSU pthreads (initially written for Ada/GNAT, though ironically latest Ada for DJGPP doesn't support tasks at all, probably because FSU was basically abandoned a long time ago). Unlike GNU pth, you don't need a socket lib (libsocket, Watt-32), so it's easier to use, allegedly. But no, it's not real threads, just faking it so that p7zip compiles (as the p stands for POSIX, which obviously needs a lot more than minimal DOS/DJGPP services to run). HX works with Win32's 7ZA.EXE with (fake) threading, but no SMP support (yet), which is super complicated anyways. Besides, 7-Zip doesn't use much multithreading except to offload some file management, so it doesn't really help that much anyways, not 10x (nor even 2x) at least. Most home computers don't have many cores anyways, and it's hard to properly scale upwards in speed. -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel As far as I know, Linux at its start supports multi-threading with preemption. For Windows, Windows 95 supports preemtive multitasking, and Windows NT 4 supports SMP. Windows 3.x only supports non-preemptive (cooperative) multitasking, which means the thread (or process, as in Windows 3.1 no thread support exists) should call some system API to give up CPU explicitly, otherwise the thread would never be switched. 7-Zip with the 7z format seems to be utilizing multiple cores. I remember once I use 7z a -t7z -mx=1 it uses 4 CPU cores to compress, and the speed is faster. Best regards, Robbie (Decheng) Fan -- Using storage to extend the benefits of virtualization and iSCSI Virtualization increases hardware utilization and delivers a new level of agility. Learn what those decisions are and how to modernize your storage and backup environments for virtualization. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51434361/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
People still use scanners? I thought they used their photocamera, then even the BIOS often/__rarely__ supports your SD cardreader in DOS without any drivers... Any scanners can save to memory cards or USB sticks? Then bad drivers could f*** o** ;-) -- Why Cloud-Based Security and Archiving Make Sense Osterman Research conducted this study that outlines how and why cloud computing security and archiving is rapidly being adopted across the IT space for its ease of implementation, lower cost, and increased reliability. Learn more. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51425301/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, it's all righth for your comments... But, i suppose, dont' have exit way.. In fact , i running arachne with older pcmcia 11 mb drivers for wifi, BUT i can't use new pcmcia card wifi up to 54 and more MB .. Impossible also using wifi pen or usb external device like printers / scanners or bluetoot.. How many time we can continue use dos with OLDER hardware? François Revol wrote: Le 05/09/2011 20:52, Bernd Blaauw a écrit : Op 5-9-2011 20:39, iw2evk schreef: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NdisWrapper why possible in linux and not under DOS? Because of manpower, working in protected mode etc? DOS is a realmode operating system. Best option I know is shims around ODI/NDIS drivers. More likely due to threading model (DOS doesn't have any). Alternatively, have fun with http://ipxe.org Other options which might have some NIC drivers: http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/ http://www.coreboot.org/ People are more than welcome to start writing IDE/ASPI driver, an UNDI packet driver, specific network card packet drivers, drivers for sound cards etc. Drivers are usually written according to a specification. Extracting a specification from an implemented (open source) driver *stack* is quite difficult. Again I suggest getting in touch with Rosetta OS: http://code.google.com/p/rosetta-os/ RTEMS landed there some info about NIC drivers ported from BSD: http://code.google.com/p/rosetta-os/wiki/RTEMSLibBSDNicDrivers Not sure the threading model used will help porting though. François. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Freedos-and-lack-of-drivers-tp32318100p32405616.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Op 6-9-2011 1:58, Alain Mouette schreef: There is an ndis set of drivers that works very well: www.netbootdisk.com I use them extensively. Alain That requires part of MS TCP/IP to be included? packet driver: OK to redistribute ODI: No idea. Free shim though NDIS: No idea. Free shim? UNDI packet driver (for network booting or gPXE/iPXE/Etherboot-like situations): no freely usable one existing. EMBOOT had a commercial version, no longer available after the company was acquired. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Op 6-9-2011 8:16, iw2evk schreef: In fact , i running arachne with older pcmcia 11 mb drivers for wifi, BUT i can't use new pcmcia card wifi up to 54 and more MB .. Impossible also using wifi pen or usb external device like printers / scanners or bluetoot.. How many time we can continue use dos with OLDER hardware? Old hardware is an issue yes, usually requiring people to have a 2nd computer handy somewhere so harddisk can be configured on another machine to get operating system files on it if the main machine lacks removable drives. Finding a 44pin to 40pin + power converter is no easy job either. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi :-) In fact , i running arachne with older pcmcia 11 mb drivers for wifi, BUT i can't use new pcmcia card wifi up to 54 and more MB .. Wireless is a pain in DOS, yes, sorry. Impossible also using wifi pen See above, unfortunately. But some network cable. or usb external device like printers / Georg / Bret drivers should work. If your printer still does not work then, it is probably cheapo GDI but slightly better printers accept PostScript or PDF - hopefully also good old plain text. Even for GDI it might be possible to convert your print data to something that the printer can use under DOS :-) scanners or bluetooth... People still use scanners? I thought they used their photocamera, then even the BIOS often supports your SD cardreader in DOS without any drivers... ;-) As for bluetooth, what apart from mobile phone headsets uses that at the moment? I guess it could also be used for wireless data transfer to mobile phones or printers, but luckily both also have USB ports :-) How many time we can continue use dos with OLDER hardware? DOS runs fine on my very modern hardware, thank you. Even Linux boots in a fraction of a minute, not one hour as dos386 suggests. DOS works great supporting my parallel printer, floppy, SATA DVD drive etc but you are right that USB3 drivers are not freeware in DOS and no drivers for hardware-accelerated FullHD movie playback with surround sound over HDMI exist: In short, DOS does not NEED new hardware... But then, I do not think we want to follow the Windows example where people are actually worried that 2 GB will not be enough RAM to write a letter in MS Office... ;-) I mean when your DOS EMM64 will support 16 GB of RAM, where do you find DOS software needing that? Maybe a Commander Keen with support for holographic screens? Would be cool, I guess. And would need multi CPU and SLI accel graphics and NCQ, which all *are* not DOS. Eric -- Malware Security Report: Protecting Your Business, Customers, and the Bottom Line. Protect your business and customers by understanding the threat from malware and how it can impact your online business. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51427462/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NdisWrapper why possible in linux and not under DOS? I suppose only because no one want to start a project for free.. Linux have a developpers comunity capable to work in team, dos have single volonteers approach. dos386 wrote: It's possible make a stubbing for use WIN drivers under freedos (maybe with HX EXTENDER?) Theoretically possible, but extremely difficult. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Freedos-and-lack-of-drivers-tp32318100p32403082.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Op 5-9-2011 20:39, iw2evk schreef: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NdisWrapper why possible in linux and not under DOS? Because of manpower, working in protected mode etc? DOS is a realmode operating system. Best option I know is shims around ODI/NDIS drivers. Alternatively, have fun with http://ipxe.org I suppose only because no one want to start a project for free.. People are more than welcome to start writing IDE/ASPI driver, an UNDI packet driver, specific network card packet drivers, drivers for sound cards etc. Drivers are usually written according to a specification. Extracting a specification from an implemented (open source) driver *stack* is quite difficult. Linux have a developpers comunity capable to work in team, dos have single volonteers approach. Big corporations funding work seems to help as well :) We tinker around with a dieing platform (DOS under UEFI? DOS under Apple machines? DOS under non-x86 architectures like ARM?). No bad thing, it makes a nice hobby and in sometimes there are actual usecases still. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Le 05/09/2011 20:52, Bernd Blaauw a écrit : Op 5-9-2011 20:39, iw2evk schreef: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NdisWrapper why possible in linux and not under DOS? Because of manpower, working in protected mode etc? DOS is a realmode operating system. Best option I know is shims around ODI/NDIS drivers. More likely due to threading model (DOS doesn't have any). Alternatively, have fun with http://ipxe.org Other options which might have some NIC drivers: http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/ http://www.coreboot.org/ People are more than welcome to start writing IDE/ASPI driver, an UNDI packet driver, specific network card packet drivers, drivers for sound cards etc. Drivers are usually written according to a specification. Extracting a specification from an implemented (open source) driver *stack* is quite difficult. Again I suggest getting in touch with Rosetta OS: http://code.google.com/p/rosetta-os/ RTEMS landed there some info about NIC drivers ported from BSD: http://code.google.com/p/rosetta-os/wiki/RTEMSLibBSDNicDrivers Not sure the threading model used will help porting though. François. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi Bernd, I suppose only because no one want to start a project for free.. Linux has more support from companies, and more users. Linux have a developpers comunity capable to work in team, dos have single volonteers approach. Big corporations funding work seems to help as well :) Exactly. We tinker around with a dieing platform (DOS under UEFI? DOS under Apple UEFI: Yes, why not? Load a BIOS int support module. machines? DOS under non-x86 architectures like ARM?). No bad thing, it Apple: Who runs Linux on Apple? I get the impression that more Mac owners run Windows in a Window. Some Linux fans run Linux in VMWare or similar, but most just pretent that MacOS itself is a bad simulation of Linux / BSD anyway ;-) makes a nice hobby and in sometimes there are actual usecases still. Non-PC hardware has been around for ages - I would not say that this means that the PC will vanish soon. And actually I do not care whether some e-book reader runs DOS, Linux, QNX or anything embedded which can only display e-books. Eric :-) -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
There is an ndis set of drivers that works very well: www.netbootdisk.com I use them extensively. Alain Em 05-09-2011 15:39, iw2evk escreveu: Hi, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NdisWrapper why possible in linux and not under DOS? I suppose only because no one want to start a project for free.. Linux have a developpers comunity capable to work in team, dos have single volonteers approach. dos386 wrote: It's possible make a stubbing for use WIN drivers under freedos (maybe with HX EXTENDER?) Theoretically possible, but extremely difficult. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
It's possible make a stubbing for use WIN drivers under freedos (maybe with HX EXTENDER?) Theoretically possible, but extremely difficult. -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Roberto is right, the lack of drivers is a major problem for DOS now. Even most printers cannot be used with DOS anymore since you cannot just send plain ASCII text to them. Either the transmission is compressed or it is a Winprinter which will work with a Windows driver only. Maybe someone can develop a wrapper for Linux device drivers so these can be used. I guess these drivers will require too much memory though. Georg -- Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! And you'll get a free Love Thy Logs t-shirt when you download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, a greath problem with freedos it's the lack of drivers for new hardware . I.e. For wifi only 11Mb pcmcia exist. No drivers for wifi usb key or umts wifi key. Anothers lack it's a free Usb cd rom drivers. Others item are : scanners, bluetoot , connecting new usb device etc. For linux, users write some drivers or using win drivers with WRAPPERS. It's possible make a stubbing for use WIN drivers under freedos (maybe with HX EXTENDER?) Roberto -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Freedos-and-lack-of-drivers-tp32318100p32318100.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Hi, Le 23/08/2011 13:32, iw2evk a écrit : Hi, a greath problem with freedos it's the lack of drivers for new hardware . I.e. For wifi only 11Mb pcmcia exist. No drivers for wifi usb key or umts wifi key. Anothers lack it's a free Usb cd rom drivers. Others item are : scanners, bluetoot , connecting new usb device etc. For linux, users write some drivers or using win drivers with WRAPPERS. It's possible make a stubbing for use WIN drivers under freedos (maybe with HX EXTENDER?) The problem with windows driver is you don't have the source to fix issues... I'd suggest FreeDOS to join the Rosetta OS initiative that was started some years ago at a GSoC mentor summit: http://code.google.com/p/rosetta-os/ The idea is to talk about ways to share drivers between all the alternative OSes around. It wasn't much active this year but hopefully it will start going again. François. -- Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system, user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-d2d-2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
