date:20150102

I think that would almost have to be emulator-related. It seems your copy
of DOSemu isn't simulating the disks fully enough for Drives to detect
them. I'd be interested to learn the extent to which it *does* simulate
them, so I could extend my program to work anyway, though.

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org wrote:

 On Linux DOSemu, DRIVES doesn't report any disks at all. I just get
 Detected drives: 0

 Here's a screenshot:
 http://www.freedos.org/jhall/temp/dosemu-drives-screenshot.png

 But from FreeDOS, I have C:, D:, E:, and Z: drives.



 DOSemu version 1.4.0.8 - 18.20131022git.fc20 on Fedora 21.

 I'm using your latest drives.zip release. (Just a suggestion, but you
 might include a version number in the zip filename, like drives10.zip or
 drives11.zip, etc., so people know what version to download.)


 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0

2015-01-02 Thread Jim Hall

The list of features on the kickstarter seem to be copied/pasted from the
FreeDOS-32 page:
http://freedos-32.sourceforge.net


Jim

On Dec 31, 2014 1:03 PM, cordat...@aol.com wrote:

 I'm curious what the specific uses are being proposed for FreeDOS-32 ?

 The kickstarter site mentions supporting DJGPP compiled programs which
use DPMI.   This is already supported in FreeDOS.

 It further mentions hard real time and threading.  There are already
user-space threading packages available ( freebie: Erick Engelke's ERTOS)
for FreeDOS.

 What is it that the developers of this project want to do that can't be
done with FreeDOS or other existing OS ?



--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] drives.exe

Jim, I think I broke the link you posted in the News section of
FreeDOS.org. Per your suggestion the archive is now called *drives11.zip*.
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0

I didn't see any mention of that, but it would be a great place to start...
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi,

I myself agree with the first and third point.

About the second, I'm not advocating for a different 32-bit OS (such as
FreeDOS-32). I also agree that one first target would be the UEFI stuff.
But at long term, I am of the opinion that VxDs are DOS drivers, as much as
the classic DEVICE= drivers are, and that is a neat way of preserve
running 16bit programs on a bubble and protected from the outside 32/64-bit
world  (and that in addition to CONFIG.SYS, has a file called SYSTEM.INI
for configuration and listing of which drivers are loaded; and a SYSTEM.INI
that has nothing to do with WIN.INI).

If FreeDOS 2.0 is going to be purely and completely 16-bit, in what differs
FreeDOS 2.0 from FreeDOS 1.3?

Aitor

PS: Btw, I continue to be a bit worried about [  www.japheth.de  ], anyone?




2015-01-02 2:31 GMT+01:00 Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org:

 It seems clear a consensus is appearing, but I'll give folks another few
 days to chime in. That will give me time to continue on website cleanup
 things, anyway. :-)


 *What I think I'm hearing: (and I agree)*

 *- FreeDOS 1.2 should be an update/refresh from FreeDOS 1.1. No major
 changes. Improved installer is a good idea.*

 *- FreeDOS 2.0 should be 16-bit. Make FreeDOS feel more modern, but keep
 it DOS. We can improve the userspace. Keep supporting old PCs, but
 support new hardware where we can. UEFI may be tricky (see SeaBIOS
 discussion).*

 *- If FreeDOS-32 will break DOS application compatibility, it should not
 use the FreeDOS name.*


 Agree or disagree with these points? Did I miss anything? Other discussion?


 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

I know, right? The IDE is Windows-based but yes, it surprisingly defaulted
to QB compatibility rather than FB.

Yeah, the lack of a 16-bit target made me pretty much write it off for this
project. The project is having string space corruption issues right now
anyway, so a C rewrite (or just forgetting the project altogether lol) may
be more prudent.



On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 12:20 PM, dos386 dos...@gmail.com wrote:

  Nevermind... figured it out. The IDE set the default language to QB
 compatibility. Duh.

 Duh! Didn't know that FreeBASIC would have a DOS IDE, even less
 one defaulting to lang QB.

 BTW, FreeBASIC 1.01.0 is out, it still mostly works, and supports DOS.

  I don't see yet how your 'simple shell' would enhance FreeDOS.
  what parts does it better then FreeCOM in what specific way?

 Note that you can't replace FreeCOM by your 'simple shell'
 compiled using FBC for the simple reason that FBC doesn't support
 16-bit 8086 target. Hacking on -gen GCC and subsequently
 compiling with WATCOM might be theoretically possible
 but is not something that would work out of the box.


 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

[Freedos-devel] freedos 1.2

2015-01-02 Thread marinelluccia1

  Hi all.

if is possible, in the new 1.2 distro please considerate
this points :

1) the defragmenter utility DON'T defragment fat32
disk.If you try to move sector via menue seem defragment, but if you
quit program and re-open you retry your disk fragmented.
2) don't exist
in FD distro a equivalent to M$ dos Shell (or pc dos shell) for task
switching/file manager.
the fdshell from Mr.Cipolla it's older and
unusable
3) the undelete program for fat32 it's in beta stage
4) i hope
in new usb drivers from Breth for activate uhci /ehci ports and with
CDR/RW support .

So i hope this program can be patched/enanched before
release of fredos 1.2 distro...

Thanks

Roberto iw2evk

Magenta (Italy)



Connetti gratis il mondo con la nuova indoona:  hai la chat, le chiamate, le 
video chiamate e persino le chiamate di gruppo.
E chiami gratis anche i numeri fissi e mobili nel mondo!
Scarica subito l’app Vai su https://www.indoona.com/

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi,

Not only about kernels, but about the 16-bit DOS compiling options too.
I think we talked about this in the past, and I think it'd make sense that
FreeDOS 2.0 would be 386+.

Aitor

2015-01-01 23:43 GMT+01:00 Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com:

 Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a minimum
 hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we exclude the
 pre-386 crowd without backlash? Personally, I think that's acceptable and
 I'm sure Microsoft would've no doubt done the same thing by now had they
 not gone to Windows. There's no way they would still include the 8086 and
 80186 in their modern MS-DOS, had they made one.


 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] AGUI user interface library released

2015-01-02 Thread Paul Dufresne

Thank you for your christmas gift!... that I just opened today!
Well, I am kind of looking for a small-easy to learn GUI for years.
And as new year began, I was looking back again at Gtk, but I might
find yours easier.
By example, just not having pkg-config in Mingw was a stopper for me with Gtk.

It's great that it is in C... because many programming languages
collaborate well with C.
E.g. D programming language interface well with C but not so well with C++.
Eh BTW, no, D is not available on DOS.

This wakeup my back in the mind for about 20 years project to write
some GUI builder tool based on:
http://lucacardelli.name/papers/toolkit.pdf

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

I think the FreeDOS 2.0 version should be a updated 16 bit kernel that can
run in real mode by default

and the freedos-32 stuff should merge with OSFree



--
View this message in context: 
http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21578.html
Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] freedos 1.2

I agree!



--
View this message in context: 
http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/freedos-1-2-tp21571p21572.html
Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

Thanks for the links, I appreciate that but I know... pretty much nothing
of Pascal lol

I think I just need to clean up my code and things should be fine.
Actually, I can't even say my code. The directory traversal routine
(which is the root of the problem) was part of an old public domain program
I found years ago.

I'll get it working eventually.  :)


On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,

 On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Mercury Thirteen
 mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Yeah, the lack of a 16-bit target made me pretty much write it off for
 this
  project. The project is having string space corruption issues right now
  anyway, so a C rewrite (or just forgetting the project altogether lol)
 may
  be more prudent.

 I'm far from an expert in QB, but if all you need is a 16-bit language
 with decent string support (while also allowing low-level system
 stuff), I'd suggest Pascal. Specifically, FreePascal (either Turbo or
 Delphi dialect) has some fairly good 16-bit target support in its
 2.7.1 snapshots:

 ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/snapshot/v27/i8086-msdos/

 N.B. These pre-built binaries are for Win32 host only. I've never
 tried rebuilding it, but it claims to work at least on OS X or Linux
 host as well. (Dunno about go32v2, seems nobody cares for that much
 anymore. Honestly, we're lucky anything works.) It does mostly work
 under HX, in limited testing, but you'll have to get that from Wayback
 since Japheth's site is AWOL.

 http://wiki.freepascal.org/DOS


 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Well, I wasn't advocating that we leave behind our 16-bit roots
altogether, because it is possible to still run 16- as well as 32-bit code
on a 32-bit OS.Then again, if we go to a 32-bit kernel and still run 16-bit
code... exactly what have we gained? Like I said before, I can see both
sides of this debate.

Keeping FreeDOS in the 16-bit realm will be the easiest thing to do and it
won't make the project inferior or hinder us that much, even if we add
modern features.

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Michael Brutman mbbrut...@brutman.com
wrote:


 What's the difference between FreeDOS 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3?  Bug fixes,
 updates to the user space packages, improvements to the installer, and
 possibly improvements to the packaging.

 I reject the argument that FreeDOS needs to evolve and leave its 16 bit
 roots behind, similar to the way MacOS did.  MacOS exists for an entirely
 different reason - to sell hardware.  FreeDOS is a much different project.

 We have more than enough work to do in user space than any of us are going
 to get done in the next decade.

 What exactly is the use case for a 32 bit FreeDOS?  Do those use cases
 justify an investment in a 32 bit FreeDOS compared to using existing
 solutions?  Where exactly are all of these developers that are going to
 create a 32 bit FreeDOS?




 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

2015-01-02 Thread Rugxulo

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Yeah, the lack of a 16-bit target made me pretty much write it off for this
 project. The project is having string space corruption issues right now
 anyway, so a C rewrite (or just forgetting the project altogether lol) may
 be more prudent.

I'm far from an expert in QB, but if all you need is a 16-bit language
with decent string support (while also allowing low-level system
stuff), I'd suggest Pascal. Specifically, FreePascal (either Turbo or
Delphi dialect) has some fairly good 16-bit target support in its
2.7.1 snapshots:

ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/snapshot/v27/i8086-msdos/

N.B. These pre-built binaries are for Win32 host only. I've never
tried rebuilding it, but it claims to work at least on OS X or Linux
host as well. (Dunno about go32v2, seems nobody cares for that much
anymore. Honestly, we're lucky anything works.) It does mostly work
under HX, in limited testing, but you'll have to get that from Wayback
since Japheth's site is AWOL.

http://wiki.freepascal.org/DOS

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

2015-01-02 Thread Michael Brutman

What's the difference between FreeDOS 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3?  Bug fixes, updates
to the user space packages, improvements to the installer, and possibly
improvements to the packaging.

I reject the argument that FreeDOS needs to evolve and leave its 16 bit
roots behind, similar to the way MacOS did.  MacOS exists for an entirely
different reason - to sell hardware.  FreeDOS is a much different project.

We have more than enough work to do in user space than any of us are going
to get done in the next decade.

What exactly is the use case for a 32 bit FreeDOS?  Do those use cases
justify an investment in a 32 bit FreeDOS compared to using existing
solutions?  Where exactly are all of these developers that are going to
create a 32 bit FreeDOS?
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi,

I don't know how that can run in real mode by default differs from
current situation.
Maybe you mean that FreeDOS drops EMM386.EXE.

Regards,
Aitor

2015-01-02 20:47 GMT+01:00 sparky4 spar...@cock.li:

I think the FreeDOS 2.0 version should be a updated 16 bit kernel that can
run in real mode by default

and the freedos-32 stuff should merge with OSFree

--
View this message in context:
http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21578.html
Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

2015-01-02 Thread Rugxulo

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Aitor Santamaría aitor...@gmail.com wrote:

 PS: Btw, I continue to be a bit worried about [  www.japheth.de  ], anyone?

http://web.archive.org/web/20140904175113/http://www.japheth.de/HX.html

Also, dare I mention, the licensing is a bit ambiguous. Great if all
you care about is freeware, lousy if you're a free software
zealot. So don't expect many (if anybody) else to mirror it anywhere.

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

i agree with everything



--
View this message in context: 
http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21580.html
Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

I agree



--
View this message in context: 
http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21585.html
Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

2015-01-02 Thread Rugxulo

Hi,

This might be longer than necessary, but I figured I may as well dump
it all on ya, just to be complete!

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks for the links, I appreciate that but I know... pretty much nothing of
 Pascal lol

My only experience has been with the easy HLL (portable) stuff. Over
the past few years, I tried to learn some (but not all) of the various
Pascal-y languages and dialects. So I spent a fair bit of time toying
with various compilers.

Here's some links to tutorials, if you think that'll help, if you
think FPC is more feasible than using OpenWatcom/C (presumably for the
much better string support):

* http://www.taoyue.com/tutorials/pascal
* http://www.oocities.org/siliconvalley/park/3230/pas/pasles00.html
* http://www.standardpascal.com/
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Pascal_and_C
* http://edn.embarcadero.com/article/images/20803/TP_55_OOP_Guide.pdf
* http://www.delphibasics.co.uk/

So I'm not much help on the systems-level stuff. Plus, since most
existing legacy TP code is compiler specific (inline asm/BASM), you
almost definitely can't recompile Paku Paku or FD KEYB (or presumably
CompInfo or Which or whatever) with ppcross8086.exe without heavy
changes. (But I doubt it's impossibly hard. Inline asm is supported
but a bit differently.)

In fact, due to platform limitations, getting it to work under HX was
a feat in itself (kludge.pas needed for compiling with smartlinking),
so even that isn't 100% automatic. I would've (obviously?) preferred
to have a go32-v2 (32-bit DOS) hosted version of the
i8086/msdos-targeted compiler, but the very few people from FPC who
hang out on BTTR's forum didn't even pretend to care. So I don't know
what tests (if any) they run on the snapshots. Maybe not even tetris
and samegame, and those were the only two official examples that I
know were tested once before.

Granted, it *does* work quite a lot, even now. But nobody had time,
skill, energy, or interest to perfect it (yet, if ever). But doing it
all myself sounded impossibly hard (esp. these days, too tired), so
I've not even pretended to hack / rebuild FPC directly.

I only mention it because it is quite a nice compiler and has had some
decent work done on it in recent years (and was April 2014 SourceForge
Project of the Month). It's certainly better than GCC or even FBC,
esp. for 16-bit support (obviously).

P.S. Do read their wiki, if actually interested. In particular, it
does support LFNs and multiple memory models. Actually, there's only
one compiler .EXE, but the separate .ZIPs have different runtimes /
libs (since the bigger ones are of more experimental quality, plus
probably to keep .ZIP size down).

 I think I just need to clean up my code and things should be fine. Actually,
 I can't even say my code. The directory traversal routine (which is the
 root of the problem) was part of an old public domain program I found years
 ago.

 I'll get it working eventually.  :)

writeln('Good luck!');

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

It wouldn't be only the speed increase, but the fact that we'd be
modernizing FreeDOS as a whole.

I think of it this way: What would Microsoft have done had they not gone
exclusively to Windows? I am doubtless they would've migrated MS-DOS to a
32-bit platform years ago. If we were to do such a move, we would not only
make the OS as fast as possible, but also open up roads to modern
development tools and allow the running of apps made by a whole host of
compilers - because not that many (in comparison) support a 16-bit target.
We would make FreeDOS more attractive to programmers because their compiler
would already have the means of generating appropriate code, they would
have no 640 KB (or 1 MB or 1.5 MB...) RAM ceiling to contend with and they
wouldn't have to worry about switching back and forth between protected
mode and real mode to run their programs.

The speed advantages which pure 32-bit would have over 16-bit + DPMI would
not only be from eliminating the delays from entering and exiting protected
mode and the associated memory copies, but also the more subtle details
like variable limit checking and the elimination of the overhead incurred
from having to work with the clumsy segment:offset addressing method.

I have no tasks which I do right now which demand more speed, but my line
of thought is that - if we're trying to take DOS where Microsoft didn't -
then going the 32-bit route would be the way to go.

On the other hand, there's the reality that, while they in all likelihood
Microsoft would've gone to 32-bits... they never did. Their DOS was a
16-bit product and all the software built for it expects it to be that way.
Keeping that tradition intact will do nothing to harm our project, and - as
Mike said - there are plenty of other things we can do to modernize and
improve the project as a whole, especially the userspace. And there's the
naming issue: anything that takes us into the 32-bit world technically is
no longer FreeDOS as we know it.

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Dave Pratt davidpr...@aol.com wrote:

 Mercury,

 It looks like your idea in terms of a benefit of a 32 bit FreeDOS is this:

  FreeDOS would suddenly be the most blazing fast DOS ever conceived.

 Fair ?

 Why do you think that pure 32 bit will be significantly faster than the
 current model of 16 bit plus DPMI ? (I suppose there is some buffer copy
 that takes place in a DOS extender for each INT 21 call ?  Is that all we
 are trying to get rid of ? )

 Why do you think yourself and other users need a faster DOS?  Are there
 tasks you're doing now that are very slow ?

 Personally new hardware is so fast compared to what we had in the 1990s
 that I don't see a benefit for most users on any increases in speed, I'm
 curious to hear your experience.

 Are there other benefits you see to the 32 bit DOS?

 Thanks,

 Dave


 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

2015-01-02 Thread Michael Brutman

FreeDOS is, by definition, a re-implementation of DOS.  If you read the
specification on the Wiki the kernel targets MS-DOS 3.3 and the
applications target MS-DOS 6.22.  There is no need to modernize FreeDOS.
Anything 32 bit would be radically different and thus is a different
project.

IBM and Microsoft did not see a future with DOS and they knew that back
fairly early on.  The marketing literature and trade press at the time was
talking about a multitasking version of DOS for the PC AT.  OS/2 was the
answer, but OS/2 1.x was horribly botched by requiring it to run on the
80286 processor and by both IBM and MS trying to work together.

Let's talk about the roadmap.

People are free to fork off and make a new project based on FreeDOS.  No
problem there.  But once you break compatibility with existing
applications, you lose a lot of your potential user base.  And as soon as
you go to 32 bits, you lose all of the early hardware.

I think that we have enough to do to make the existing FreeDOS a pleasant
operating system to install and use.  And I think a lot of that work is in
user space.  We need a better installer.  We need more (16 bit)
applications.  And I'm sure that some of our existing 16 bit utilities
could use some modernization and freshening too.  Look at mTCP as an
example of what can be done to modernize a good class of applications
(networking) and still do it in 16 bit code that does not break anybody.

Or people can go off and work on a new 32 bit variant of DOS in the hopes
that they'll attract more programmers and fresh applications to the new
platform.

The great news is that anybody can go off and do whatever they want to as
this is all a hobbyist effort anyway.  But lets stop calling it a
discussion about the FreeDOS roadmap.  Once it goes to 32 bits its not
FreeDOS anymore.  Copy the code and start again, but lets not confuse the
two projects anymore.
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi,

That's my guess:

2015-01-02 0:05 GMT+01:00 cordat...@aol.com:

 If you take a look one of the links from Jim recently he states:

 But in an alternate reality, what would DOS had looked like if Microsoft
 *hadn't* moved to Windows? I think we get to define what that looks like.


My guess is that if Windows (the GUI) hadn't existed, then DOS386.EXE would
have been packed with MS-DOS, it would have never been renamed to
WIN386.EXE or VMM32.VXD, and MS-DOS would have had a wonderful multitasker
that allows you to switch between different MS-DOS sessions, and thus fully
profit from the power of a 386.

My guess is that the decision to pack DOS386.EXE with Windows (3.X+) and
not with MS-DOS was a commercial one, to push the market into Windows, and
not a technical one (just as the abilities of the NT kernel to run POSIX
and OS/2 applications were underdeveloped).

Commercially wise, but a pitty for software with such a huge potential  :)



 Think for a second about what Microsoft, or any company would have done to
 continue DOS development ?

 They would have started by trying to understand what users would be doing
 with the new software.  What kinds of things are users requesting that
 can't be done with MS-DOS 6.22 ?  What could we do to increase market share
 for DOS compared to other operating systems?


 In my opinion, users usually like to run classic apps but profiting from
new hardware's capabilities. 386 gives you a way to access huge amounts of
memories and multitask, and that can be done in a 100% DOS flavour (as
DOS386/VMM32 proves).

But I am repeating my arguments from other mails, I hope I managed to
explain my position this time  :)

Cheers,
Aitor
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

2015-01-02 Thread Christopher Evans

That's why I suggest two kernels, 16 and 32 and make it switchable like
through a boot up keywords like F7.

--
-Chris Evans
Computer Consultant, Systems Administrator, Programmer, PC technician
Digitalatoll Solutions Group (Tawhaki Software)
Cell.   : 916-612-6904 | http://www.tawhakisoft.slyip.net/
Office: 916-382-9395 | http://www.digitalatoll.com/
Skype: chris.evans450 | http://norcalhost.com/


On Jan 2, 2015 5:24 PM, Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 1/1/2015 2:43 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
  Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a
  minimum hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we
  exclude the pre-386 crowd without backlash?
 
 Absolutely NOT!

 Ralf

 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 http://www.avast.com



 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion


On 1/1/2015 7:15 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
 We can add modern OS features (protected memory and multitasking are 
still quite doable) without jumping to 32-bit code. After all, there 
obviously already is a 32-bit FreeDOS project, and it wouldn't really 
make sense to have /two/ 32-bit versions of FreeDOS.
I doubt that you will even see one (1) 32-bit version of FreeDOS. 
Whoever is seriously claiming on working on that just doesn't know what 
they will get themselves into.
MS/PC/DR-/FreeDOS is at its very core 16bit/x86. You get yourself in one 
development hell if you try to change that.
And what advantage does a 32bit FreeDOS supposed to have? What 
application would you run on it?


Ralf


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Thank you Rugxulo!

I always was somewhat concerned about such licensing issues, but
the software looks pretty valuable!  :)

Aitor

2015-01-02 23:24 GMT+01:00 Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com:

 Hi,

 On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Aitor Santamaría aitor...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  PS: Btw, I continue to be a bit worried about [  www.japheth.de  ],
 anyone?

 http://web.archive.org/web/20140904175113/http://www.japheth.de/HX.html

 Also, dare I mention, the licensing is a bit ambiguous. Great if all
 you care about is freeware, lousy if you're a free software
 zealot. So don't expect many (if anybody) else to mirror it anywhere.


 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0

2015-01-02 Thread Bertho Grandpied


On Wed, 31 Dec 2014, Jim Hall jh...@org wrote :

 let's look at the history of DOS
 MSDOS 4 had multitasking, but that was taken out
before MSDOS 4.01.

Lest I forgot, a happy new year to all !

And, Jim, a correction, as you seem to be confused here.
Mutitasking DOS was European MSDOS 4, a  different codebase 
by unrelated teams than regular MS-DOS versions. It was not released
but almost confidentially by a couple of OEMs, and it has had no progeniture.

MS-DOS 4.01 (a quick fix for the horribly buggy MS-DOS 4.0, which
randomly trashed the hard disk FATs) was the regular successor
to long lived MS-DOS 3.x versions.

Sorry for the nit picking, best regards

-- 
Czerno

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/1/2015 2:43 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
 Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a 
 minimum hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we 
 exclude the pre-386 crowd without backlash?

Absolutely NOT!

Ralf

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/2/2015 2:28 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
 It wouldn't be only the speed increase, but the fact that we'd be 
 modernizing FreeDOS as a whole.

 I think of it this way: What would Microsoft have done had they not 
 gone exclusively to Windows? I am doubtless they would've migrated 
 MS-DOS to a 32-bit platform years ago. If we were to do such a move, 
 we would not only make the OS as fast as possible, but also open up 
 roads to modern development tools and allow the running of apps made 
 by a whole host of compilers - because not that many (in comparison) 
 support a 16-bit target. We would make FreeDOS more attractive to 
 programmers because their compiler would already have the means of 
 generating appropriate code, they would have no 640 KB (or 1 MB or 1.5 
 MB...) RAM ceiling to contend with and they wouldn't have to worry 
 about switching back and forth between protected mode and real mode to 
 run their programs.
Sorry but I think you need to get real here. 32bit over 16bit brings 
pretty much no speed advantage at all for a DOS program. Today's CPUs 
are a factor of 60 faster then even the fastest 486 CPU at the end of 
the DOS era. And have more cache RAM than a system back then had even 
as total RAM. And that is magnitudes faster today then it was back then. 
A real 16 bit DOS program is screamingly fast these days, you will not 
gain any serious advantage by running in 32bit. The amount of memory 
available is a slight improvement, but then most likely just resulting 
in the improvement of software bloat as well...

 The speed advantages which pure 32-bit would have over 16-bit + DPMI 
 would not only be from eliminating the delays from entering and 
 exiting protected mode and the associated memory copies, but also the 
 more subtle details like variable limit checking and the elimination 
 of the overhead incurred from having to work with the clumsy 
 segment:offset addressing method.
Do you even remotely have an idea on how many function calls (INT21h) 
within DOS this is required/expected? Not to mention things like video 
both for INT10h or direct write access?

 I have no tasks which I do right now which demand more speed, but my 
 line of thought is that - if we're trying to take DOS where Microsoft 
 didn't - then going the 32-bit route would be the way to go.
Sorry, but that way is just a road to nowhere. As you would loose the 
100% application compatibility in a heartbeat...

Ralf

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion


 I doubt that you will even see one (1) 32-bit version of FreeDOS. Whoever
 is seriously claiming on working on that just doesn't know what they will
 get themselves into. MS/PC/DR-/FreeDOS is at its very core 16bit/x86. You
 get yourself in one development hell if you try to change that. And what
 advantage does a 32bit FreeDOS supposed to have? What application would you
 run on it?


I've detailed the advantages in several other emails, and so far as what
applications would run on it... both traditional DOS apps and new 32-bit
applications as well.


What exactly would you mean by 32 bit kernel? What is the kernel? I
 always get the impression that people that mention stuff like this don't
 know how DOS works and take their inspiration from Linux or other,
 similar sized and focused OS...


The kernel, in the case of MS-DOS, would be IO.SYS. For FreeDOS it's
KERNEL.SYS - basically the core of the DOS, minus the interface shell.


Do you even remotely have an idea on how many function calls (INT21h)
 within DOS this is required/expected? Not to mention things like video
 both for INT10h or direct write access?


Yes, 114 in interrupt 0x21, not including the others in the 0x2x series
which DOS uses. I'm sure there are some I'm missing, not to mention the
video BIOS routines and such which you mention, so I would guess around two
to three hundred functions total. That's actually not that many compared to
other operating systems - the classic MacOS and Windows both have literally
thousands of function calls and services.


Sorry, but that way is just a road to nowhere. As you would loose the
 100% application compatibility in a heartbeat...


Compatibility would not necessarily be lost, as I've detailed in other
emails as well.


All that said, I have no problem with FreeDOS staying 16-bit. Perhaps
Microsoft would not have integrated 32-bit support and just packaged their
own extender, as Aitor noted. Regardless, we have an excellent piece of
software capable of doing amazing things no matter how we choose to evolve
it. I'm not fighting for one side of the argument or the other here, I'm
just presenting my thoughts on either way the outcome could be.
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Good Reading Materials

On 1/2/2015 9:03 AM, Andy Stamp wrote:
 Hello Folks,

 I've been working on creating a program called LPXLATE which converts 
 ESC/P print data from legacy apps into PCL or PS for printing on 
 modern printers.

 Most of my time has been spent working on the conversion routines, but 
 I would like to start working on integrating this code into a TSR that 
 could be installed and would hijack calls to output bytes to the 
 parallel port and feed them into this app which in turn would output 
 the translated data via the parallel port.

 I am wondering what resources I should look into for info on hijacking 
 BIOS calls (INT 17h) and creating TSRs.

 I downloaded a copy of Ralf Brown's interrupt list and found Peter 
 Norton's guide to programming the IBM PC at a thrift store.

 A quick Googling suggests Undocumented DOS and the IBM PC XT hardware 
 reference.
 Is there any proprietary info in these that would taint my 
 contributions to FreeDOS?
These are all valid resources, published for the very purpose of 
developing DOS based software.

 Obviously reading leak MS/DR-DOS source code is bad, but I want to 
 make sure.

Those are of course off-limits. (Well, a bit questionable in case of 
DR-DOS, I don't know what exactly the license said when it was briefly 
available as OpenDOS)

Ralf

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

2015-01-02 Thread Steve Nickolas

On Fri, 2 Jan 2015, Mercury Thirteen wrote:

 I've detailed the advantages in several other emails, and so far as what
 applications would run on it... both traditional DOS apps and new 32-bit
 applications as well.

Might be trickier if you're talking about 16-bit apps that hit the metal. 
Even Win9x had a 16-bit DOS under the hood.

 The kernel, in the case of MS-DOS, would be IO.SYS. For FreeDOS it's
 KERNEL.SYS - basically the core of the DOS, minus the interface shell.

More precisely: the MS-DOS kernel is split between IO.SYS (the DOS BIOS) 
and MSDOS.SYS (the BDOS).  DR DOS maintains this distinction, using the 
names from PC DOS (IBMBIO.COM and IBMDOS.COM respectively).  It is a 
distinction inherited from CP/M.

-uso.

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/2/2015 12:30 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
 Well, I wasn't advocating that we leave behind our 16-bit roots 
 altogether, because it is possible to still run 16- as well as 32-bit 
 code on a 32-bit OS.Then again, if we go to a 32-bit kernel and still 
 run 16-bit code... exactly what have we gained? Like I said before, I 
 can see both sides of this debate.

What exactly would you mean by 32 bit kernel? What is the kernel? I 
always get the impression that people that mention stuff like this don't 
know how DOS works and take their inspiration from Linux or other, 
similar sized and focused OS...

Ralf

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Vote noted! :)

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 1/1/2015 2:43 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
  Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a
  minimum hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we
  exclude the pre-386 crowd without backlash?
 
 Absolutely NOT!

 Ralf

 ---
 This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
 http://www.avast.com



 --
 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
 sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
 your
 hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
 leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
 look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
 ___
 Freedos-devel mailing list
 Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/2/2015 3:29 PM, Michael Brutman wrote:
 The great news is that anybody can go off and do whatever they want to 
 as this is all a hobbyist effort anyway. But lets stop calling it a 
 discussion about the FreeDOS roadmap.  Once it goes to 32 bits its not 
 FreeDOS anymore.  Copy the code and start again, but lets not confuse 
 the two projects anymore.
+1

Ralf

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Aitor Santamaría aitor...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thank you Rugxulo!


+1 :)
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion