Re: [Freedos-devel] Template for writing DOS Device Drivers in Open Watcom C
El mié., 24 ago. 2022 21:37, Jim Hall escribió: If you're up for it, I think this would be a *great* article to write > for the wiki. If you don't have a FreeDOS wiki account, let me know > and I can make an account for you. > Hi Jim, An article for the wiki sounds good. I'm now busy with the next vmsmount release, but I'm surely up for writing a howto on developing a simple device driver in C. (AFAIK, I don't have a wiki account) Eduardo. > ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
While thinking about 64k limit for edit... I come to think about 16 bits and 32 bits programs... Why there is no two separate versions of FreeDOS, one for 16 bits CPUs (8086) and one for 32 bits CPU (386+)? It seems there is a lot of programs that cannot run on 8086... and others that could take advantage of 32 bits compilation. Does it should not suggest to have two separate versions foir this relatively different needs? ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hello Paul, On 25 Aug 2022, at 9:41, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote: > While thinking about 64k limit for edit... I come to think about 16 bits and > 32 bits programs... > > Why there is no two separate versions of FreeDOS, one for 16 bits CPUs (8086) > and one for 32 bits CPU (386+)? > > It seems there is a lot of programs that cannot run on 8086... and others > that could take advantage of 32 bits compilation. > > Does it should not suggest to have two separate versions foir this relatively > different needs? > > the 64kb limit is not imposed by DOS. It is a decision made by the developer of that application. A 16bit DOS program running on 16bit FreeDOS can access up to 4 GB of RAM if available. But that is something the developer must program that way. BTW, there is a 64bit version of FreeDOS (but it does not run on bare metal hardware): https://github.com/dosemu2/fdpp Greetings Carsten ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hi Paul, While thinking about 64k limit for edit... I come to think about 16 bits and 32 bits programs... Why there is no two separate versions of FreeDOS, one for 16 bits CPUs (8086) and one for 32 bits CPU (386+)? That is not necessary - you mentioned a 32-bit version of some text editor, which already IS included :-) See http://freedos.org/software/ ==> https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/group-edit.html for example SETEDIT is 32-bit and can edit large files, but maybe we should explicitly tell WHICH editors are 32-bit. To be honest, I do not know for several others. It seems there is a lot of programs that cannot run on 8086... Those should be excluded in 8086 installs, but as far as I remember, at least one of the installers already pays attention to that. Mateusz and Jerome might know more :-) and others that could take advantage of 32 bits compilation. See above. Does it should not suggest to have two separate versions foir this relatively different needs? As said, not necessary, but we could advertise 32-bit apps more clearly as such. For which other apps do you prefer to use a 32-bit version? Regards, Eric ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Le jeu., 25 août 2022 04:10:17 -0400 Eric Auer a écrit > That is not necessary - you mentioned a 32-bit version > of some text editor, which already IS included :-) See > > http://freedos.org/software/ ==> > > https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/group-edit.html > > > for example SETEDIT is 32-bit and can edit large files, you are asking me, the user way too much thinking! I want edit to work on big files... not an edit for small files and an other that I must search for for big files. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] Ré : MBR not written by default?
Checking 1st sector signature will probably not work (because FDISK probably create a valid signature even if no MBR present. So I guess the correct way is to overwrite by default the MBR... so don't make if frightening to the user. I would so propose: "Install MBR (that allows booting)? (Yes/no) (only say no if you already use a boot loader you want to keep like Grub)" ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Would it be possible to have edit.exe for 64k less files... edit32.exe for bigger files... and edit.bat that would check fif the requested file to edit is bigger than 64k and then call edit32 on the file, else edit.exe on the file?___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hi, On 25 Aug 2022, at 11:07, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote: > Would it be possible to have edit.exe for 64k less files... edit32.exe for > bigger files... and edit.bat that would check fif the requested file to edit > is bigger than 64k and then call edit32 on the file, else edit.exe on the > file? There is no reason why edit.com should not be able to edit large files. Addressing 640KB of RAM is possible on any 8086 PC, and with the help of EMS/XMS addressing larger memory is possible. >From my point of view, there is no need to have a 32bit program to edit files >> 64kb. Greetings Carsten ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
> Would it be possible to have edit.exe for 64k less files... > edit32.exe for bigger files... absolutely yes. just copy setedit.exe to edit32.exe. done. > and edit.bat that would check fif the > requested file to edit is bigger than 64k and then call edit32 on > the file, else edit.exe on the file? it's still beyond my understanding why you don't want to edit small files with edit32 Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hi,
On 25 Aug 2022, at 9:41, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote:
> While thinking about 64k limit for edit... I come to think about 16 bits and
> 32 bits programs...
>
the 64kb limit is an artificial limit in the source code of the "edit" tool:
https://gitlab.com/FreeDOS/base/edit-freedos/-/blob/master/SOURCE/EDIT/EDIT.C
/* check file size */
if (sb.st_size > 64000UL)
{
ermsg = DFmalloc(strlen(FileName)+100); /* alloc fixed 0.7a */
strcpy(ermsg, "File too large for this version of Edit:\n");
strcat(ermsg, FileName);
ErrorMessage(ermsg);
free(ermsg);
return;
}
The program "edit.exe" is compiled in the "large" memory model, it *should* be
able to use the whole available DOS memory, at least more than 64kb.
Maybe it's time to remove that limit from the tool.
Greetings
Carsten
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
I do not think it will be that easy. It is probably hitting the 16 unsigned int
range, and also accounting that large memory model only allows to allocate
blocks of up to 64K (you are looking for huge).
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Remitente: Carsten Strotmann
Destinatario: Technical discussion and questions for FreeDOS developers.
Fecha: jueves, 25 de agosto de 2022, 13:44:08
Asunto: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits
and 32 bits?
Archivos:
--===--
Hi,
On 25 Aug 2022, at 9:41, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote:
> While thinking about 64k limit for edit... I come to think about 16 bits and
> 32 bits programs...
the 64kb limit is an artificial limit in the source code of the "edit" tool:
https://gitlab.com/FreeDOS/base/edit-freedos/-/blob/master/SOURCE/EDIT/EDIT.C
/* check file size */
if (sb.st_size > 64000UL)
{
ermsg = DFmalloc(strlen(FileName)+100); /* alloc fixed 0.7a */
strcpy(ermsg, "File too large for this version of Edit:\n");
strcat(ermsg, FileName);
ErrorMessage(ermsg);
free(ermsg);
return;
}
The program "edit.exe" is compiled in the "large" memory model, it *should* be
able to use the whole available DOS memory, at least more than 64kb.
Maybe it's time to remove that limit from the tool.
Greetings
Carsten
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hi, On 25 Aug 2022, at 13:50, Bitácora de Javier Gutiérrez Chamorro wrote: > I do not think it will be that easy. It is probably hitting the 16 unsigned > int range, and also accounting that large memory model only allows to > allocate blocks of up to 64K (you are looking for huge). yes, or it would need a different data structure, not a simple array for the text. Like: Gap buffer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_buffer Rope: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope_(data_structure) Piece Table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piece_table More on the topic: https://www.texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?DesigningTextEditors I agree, that is major work. But there are many good (and free) text editors available for DOS that can edit large text. "edit.exe" is a simple and limited tool, but good enough for the intended use case. Greetings Carsten ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 03:41:30 -0400 Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote: > While thinking about 64k limit for edit... I come to think about 16 > bits and 32 bits programs... > > Why there is no two separate versions of FreeDOS, one for 16 bits > CPUs (8086) and one for 32 bits CPU (386+)? > > It seems there is a lot of programs that cannot run on 8086... and > others that could take advantage of 32 bits compilation. > > Does it should not suggest to have two separate versions foir this > relatively different needs? Even though it can run on XTs, FreeDOS targets newer hardware including hardware beyond the DOS era. It does a great job at that. But in it's current state, I don't see any point in using it with an XT. You're better off using DOS 3.x or CP/M and friends. If you are looking for an OS that can do more on an XT I would suggest ELKS (https://github.com/jbruchon/ELKS). Besides the 64k limit, FreeDOS Edit is horrible to use on an XT. Compared to norton editor or edit.com, the drawing of the interface is so slow you can see it happening. -- WWW: https://metalpunks.info GPG: C90CAB7122AC1231 pgp8RGXcHDMZT.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
> But there are many good (and free) > text editors available for DOS that can edit large text. True enough. and people have had time enough (it's 2022) to select one of them that suits their needs. and there are multiple (of varying taste and quality) in FreeDOS and elsewhere. but none of them comes as close in behaviour (like shortcuts, menu structure etc.) to MS Edit as the one that FreeDOS choses to call 'EDIT'. > "edit.exe" is a simple and limited tool, but good enough for the intended use > case. actually edit.exe was not the intended use case. EDIT was just the first (and only ?) application using the DFLAT library. DFLAT was decribed and implemented as multiple articles in Dr.Dobbs magazine, demonstrating and implementing windows(tm) programming techniques. so the intended use case was 'demonstrate windows programming technique'. never to be a useful editor. this happened more or less by chance. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
>it's still beyond my understanding why you don't want to edit small >files with edit32 > > Tom Well, because the full idea is more like: If file < 64k then edit.exe the file else (file > 64k) if processor 386+ edit32 the file else error "sorry, file to big!" endif enfif So that it works both on 8086 and 386+. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
At first I thought that edit was http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/repositories/unstable/pkg-html/msedit.html and realized it was a 32 bit program, written entirely in FreeBASIC. I did not tried it... just thinking maybe on a 386+ system, we could use it... and keep the other edit for older than 386 ?___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
> Besides the 64k limit, FreeDOS Edit is horrible to use on an XT. > Compared to norton editor or edit.com, the drawing of the interface > is so slow you can see it happening. if you own an XT, you have probably become used to an editor for the last 30 years on it. I don't see the point chosing another one. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
> On Aug 25, 2022, at 4:10 AM, Eric Auer wrote: > [..] >> It seems there is a lot of programs that cannot run on 8086... > > Those should be excluded in 8086 installs, but as far as > I remember, at least one of the installers already pays > attention to that. Mateusz and Jerome might know more :-) Since a user is most likely not going to have either a CD or USB drive in a system that is not at least a 386, the CD and USB media will install programs that require s 386. Those also boot the 32bit kernel. The Floppy Edition boots the 16bit kernel. It installs based on hardware capabilities. At present, you must tell it to limit its install to only 8086, 186 or 286 machines. Otherwise, it will assume at least a 386 level of support. Eventually when I have the time (and feel like it), I will get around to updating the CPU detection and auto detection of sub-386 machines. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 16:43:41 +0200 tom ehlert wrote: > if you own an XT, you have probably become used to an editor for the > last 30 years on it. I don't see the point chosing another one. > > Tom There are new XTs being sold (https://monotech.fwscart.com) and it's kind of a trend these days for people who weren't born back then to buy and refurbish an XT to play with it. -- WWW: https://metalpunks.info GPG: C90CAB7122AC1231 pgpUqNkMX5uY1.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
For what it's worth: I have a 286 I still use. A 286 is enough for the Win95 version of EDIT.COM (it uses some 186 opcodes), so that's usually what I go with. It's still important to *me* to be able to support 8086 and 286 PCs. But with that said, I've felt that that's best done by me coding the support I want my damnself, so far as I can. And there's the rub... I have a different style of pretty much everything compared to most of the people here (it's a main reason I went my own way and started work on my own MS-DOS clone, even though apart from some little pieces of the userland I really didn't get all that far). FreeDOS, for the most part, targets the high end - 386, 486 and beyond (this is my perception and my opinion). I decided to try to target the low end and try to bring some of the MS-DOS 6 capabilities to MS-DOS 3.3, until I could do something about the lower-level stuff like kernel and command.com which are still (despite me writing a nearly complete implementation in C of command.com 20 years ago it is too broken to be practical) outside my wheelhouse. But all of this is my opinion. I was the one who did a bunch of testing of FreeDOS back in the day on a really oddball XT clone (the Tandy 1000HX); that had an 8088. -uso. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Could almost all packages use links?
Hi Paul, > I know some packages use "Links" to make executables in the > executable %PATH% to make them callable from any directory. You're probably talking about the BAT and COM files in C:\FreeDOS\LINKS. > The question I ask myslf, is why is is the exception rather than the norm? Because probably nobody cared so far. And not everybody wants it that way. > Would it make it significantly slower? No. But it takes more space on disk, because every "link" occupies one cluster on disk. Size of a cluster depends on HDD capacity and partition type (FAT12, FAT16, FAT32). E.g., on a 2 GB FAT16 partition a cluster is 32 KB large. B64.COM is only 76 bytes large, but takes 32 KB nevertheless. On a 2 GB FAT32 partition a cluster is only 4 KB large, so B64.COM would take 4 KB only. Default cluster size for NTFS, FAT, and exFAT https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/default-cluster-size-for-ntfs-fat-and-exfat-9772e6f1-e31a-00d7-e18f-73169155af95 Not to forget: More links also means higher chance for a name conflict. Cheers, Robert -- BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] edit and ospedit limited to 64k?
Hi Paul, > One of my reflex when going to Games\Vertigo was "edit vertigo.txt" to read > the file. > It say the file is too big for this version of edit. > "edlin vertigo.txt" worked... as "less vertigo.txt"... I think the file was > 79k... not sure at all... > but I am kind of surprised that edit (and ospeditt) would be 64k limited. > > Do we want to limit it to 64k because the original MS one was (if it was)? I don't think so. See below. > There seems to have no readon ospedit would have to be 64k limited. 64k is the size of a segment. So it's easier for the programmer to store the whole file in one segment and handle it this way in his code. Cheers, Robert -- BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hi Eric, > for example SETEDIT is 32-bit and can edit large files, > but maybe we should explicitly tell WHICH editors are > 32-bit. To be honest, I do not know for several others. At minimum these are 32-bit: BLOCEK EMACS FED MINED VIM Cheers, Robert -- BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hi tom, >> But there are many good (and free) >> text editors available for DOS that can edit large text. > > True enough. and people have had time enough (it's 2022) to select one Not everbody is with DOS since the 1980s. There are still DOS newbies around from time to time. > but none of them comes as close in behaviour (like shortcuts, menu > structure etc.) to MS Edit as the one that FreeDOS choses to call > 'EDIT'. There also is the already mentioned MS Edit from Mateusz. (But it's 32-bit.) Cheers, Robert -- BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hallo Herr Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel, am Donnerstag, 25. August 2022 um 15:41 schrieben Sie: > >>it's still beyond my understanding why you don't want to edit small >>files with edit32 >> >> Tom > Well, because the full idea is more like: > If file < 64k > then edit.exe the file else (file >> 64k) > if processor 386+ > edit32 the file > else > error "sorry, file to big!" > endif > enfif I think this should be if processor 386+ edit32 the file else edit.exe the file endif IMHO getting a different editor depending on filesize is not your best idea and btw it's not necessary to have a 386+ CPU to edit a 500 KB+ file. there were definitively (nonfree) editors around in 80286 times. all that is required is a programmer that wants to implement this. I wouldn't hold my breath though. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Why there is no two versions of FreeDOS: 16 bits and 32 bits?
Hi Robert, >>> But there are many good (and free) >>> text editors available for DOS that can edit large text. >> >> True enough. and people have had time enough (it's 2022) to select one > Not everbody is with DOS since the 1980s. There are still DOS newbies > around from time to time. welcome. just remember that we had even the holy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war how would we be able to indoctrinate newbies into one single editor religion? I think even newbies should be given the chance to select from https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/group-edit.html and multiple other sources to change their own religion? disclaimer: I'm probably no expert in DOS editors (anymore). over the last 20 years of my freedos engagement I haven't used an editor on my dos instances more then 20 times (quick editing autoexec/config ). everything else is edited on a multifile, multiwindow, multiscreen AND multigigabyte machine and copied to the machine. takes <1s with a virtual machine and <10 s with a physical floppy. of course, if as a hobby you want to have a feel for 1980 XT developement pain you should use edlin. ok, nobody used edlin ever. but professional editors could be pricey... but still nobody used edlin. ever. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
