Re: [Freedos-devel] CDs, DVD, bonus and/or devel
from Paul Dufresne: > I am for 3) Move all development related packages onto their own disc. Have > DevelCD and seperate BonusCD. > The download time (and bandwidth) make me want to go that direction... > obviously the cost is in part in deciding which > packages goes on which CD... and the installation related stuff... but I feel > it is worth to be done. > The fact that some would drop the new packages made me think a bit. > I realize that for many, probably most, FreeDOS is only there to make old > programs (most likely proprietary) continue to work. > And I do ask myself a bit if the time I put on working on DJGPP related > stuff... would not be put with more long time effect if it > was put on a more recent OS, whichever it is. By more recent OS, do you mean a version of DOS, or something more capable, like Linux, BSD or other like maybe Haiku? DJGPP is the DOS port of gcc, which has been built for or ported to many (quasi-)Unix and other OSes. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Does FreeDOS (or something) sometime automatically break up an hard disk in 2GB sub-disks?
from Paul Dufresne: X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfKd47ohH1YA36A1losjJBot7GMwkbWvOtl6rINYtlwRqOtViYfQBlfD8+fdrx5Ja3Acjmqrcs9xT5E9Y0aXU/dbJaMGb3FiVk8MHG+pxyDGGbaY9K6o3 CK18XJ3z3AvBfnljWAMf796346rVTM2GyhX18cbKccZ+PF2SCc8WVh6cNlQd0OOZHCStVzgCrr7fQ7m1f7vjW/dam6WG81EaL6k= > [-- Attachment #1 --] > [-- Type: multipart/alternative, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 2.5K --] > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="=_Part_44948_433422294.1632371148895" > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I was testing an old laptop (Thinkpad I think, 2 cores, with a 60 GB hard > disk). > I wanted to install a Linux, but as the CPU was 32 bits, I had some > difficulty finding a 32 bits OS. > One of my USB keys, had FreeDOS beta on it... so I tried it. > When installing, I saw (was scrolling fast)... that it was assigning letters > to a lot (maybe A: to L:), to > 2 GB hard drives it was detecting. I did not care that much, and tried to > install on the 2 Gb first disk C:. > And it installed fine... except not long after I found an other USB key with > Debian 32 bits and installed it. > I am pretty sure the laptop have only one 60 GB hard disk and not many 2 GB > hard disk. > I came to my mind that maybe the kernel or the installer... knows more than > me that the BIOS is limited > to 2 GB, and somehow it chop the disk in 2 GB sub-disks... maybe the BIOS > itself could do it... > Have you heard of such things before? Why do you need to subdivide the 60 GB hard disk into 2 GB partitions? You can make a partition, like maybe the first, with just under 8 GB and format FAT32. I assume the laptop with 60 GB hard disk was designed to be bootable from such a hard disk and that the boot code would not have to be confined to the first 2 GB? Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FDISK issue
from Wilhelm Spiegl: [-- Attachment #1 --] [-- Type: text/html, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 8.2K --] Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Hallo Eric, ich verstehe es einfach nicht: Erst erhalte ich unter Qemu und Virtualbox ständig diese Fehler beim Ausführen von Format - und plötzlich sind sie weg. Was bedeuten diese Error 36, und 129 sowie +***bad sectors: 1 (code 0x201) on WRITE +***bad sectors: 1 (code 0x201) on READ One of the first 5 sectors is broken. Format not possible bzw. unknown unit for driver Wie können solche Fehler in einer vhd passieren? Ich arbeite mit SSD-Festplatten. Wo kann ich bei der Fehlersuche ansetzen? Bei der Suche ist mir aufgefallen, daß ich bei mehreren Festplatten im System mit jeweils einer primären Partition mit fdisk ALLE Festplatten auf AKTIV setzen kann, ohne daß sich FreeDOS daran stört. Das war mir neu. Es startet einfach von der ersten Festplatte im System. Gruß Willi This is a nuisance to read, HTML where most of the messages are plain-text. I could separate the HTML portion into a file and view with a text-mode (lynx or elinks) or graphical browser, but don't see why I should make that extra effort. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] USB Image Capacity
> Hello Everyone, X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfA920hUkLnruGcONOWwGtbN+bHCS/LjGVHQvsYwCcSUoLUuZZSPTLONt8CAxcZtkYYEiI5Dfos4Am4hrri3t66YoahhsiHvqRfZKv/b33pjLnQ7Ll42Q EA0viQ4Dg+xcImtKyN6LdvHfm0BDjQJCpxLpqP+HwF4LsfnALJR6ccKiQNiowolZ/zusxYBoD+Vrk6S9I16UZW64k+n5KeHxJL4= > As you may have noticed in RC4, we decided to reduce the size of the LiteUSB > stick. Since that edition only contains BASE, it can be squeezed onto a 16mb > flash drive or memory car with about 0.5mb of free space leftover. Those who > need to drop some files on a flash drive can use the 512mb FullUSB image. It > has roughly 140mb of unused capacity. > There are pros and cons to using such a small image. Iâll just mention a > couple off the top of my head. > PRO: Although they are becoming more rare, flash storage of that capacity > does still exist. It seems wasteful to force someone to use a larger flash > drive than required. > CON: Flash storage under 1gb are getting rare. It may be much more useful to > users to have that extra free space already on their flash drive without the > need to jump through hoops. Perhaps, maybe even the FullUSB image should be > 1 or 2gb leaving tons of free space. > CON: In theory, if the capacity was greater, we could provide a simple tool > (maybe a dozen commands or so in a batch file) that could change the install > media to a working FreeDOS on USB stick. > In an ideal world, the images would âshipâ as small as possible. Then we > would have a user friendly multi-platform tool to expand the image to use the > entire capacity of the flash medium. But, we donât have one. And, I donât > really have the spare time to do one myself at present. > What are your thoughts on the size and extra capacity for the LiteUSB edition > of the release? > Or maybe, just have a FullUSB edition and there is no point in having a > LiteUSB? > :-) > Jerome Where do you find USB sticks < 4 GB? Even 4 GB is scarce now, and if available, likely to cost as much as 8 GB. Smaller USB image might be easier to download for somebody without the latest broadband speeds, but for writing to a flash drive, there is no point in anything less than the FullUSB edition. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] New Old Timer reporting :-)
> On 11/19/2020 3:36 AM, Harald Arnesen wrote: > > I have no idea if such a thing exists (and that is not my point). You > > were not aware of any standalone JS interpreters, I showed you that they > > exist - although not for DOS. > That is the whole point, after all we ARE talking (Free)DOS here... > Ralf Resending this message because I forgot to include the Subject: line : Lack of Javascript support is one thing that makes serious web browsing near-impossible on any DOS. There was years ago an attempt at DOSzilla. I once downloaded and had a standalone Javascript interpreter for OS/2 Warp 4. Since OS/2 Warp installation crashed the hard drive in April 2001 and could never again be booted, I was never again able to run any OS/2 software, and was not interested in eComStation and ArcaOS when Linux, FreeBSD and NetBSD were so much better. I had many years of Internet with DR-DOS 7.03. I did later manage to access the internet with FreeDOS, but insufficiency of browser capabilities prevented me from going far in that direction. Has anybody ever done onine banking from (Free or other)DOS? Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] New Old Timer reporting :-)
from zz zz: --===6725751721200256742== Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 hi > DOS is based on 8086 architecture, with 1MB of RAM Wasn't protected mode supposed to extend that? Anyways, I'm running on a 48MB machine and even DSL and tinycore had problems with such a low amount, which is somewhat disturbing for the preservation of technology. > and at times rather finicky ways to extended this amount for application running on top of DOS. what would be the maximum? 32 bits can address 4GB, 16 bits would be 64KB (which is definetely NOT enough for everyone :D) so it's already kind of a hack to have anything in between.. (snip) First thing you need to do when asking such a question is make it more readable, not muddy with HTML codes. Nasty to read! Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] (no subject)
> On 11/19/2020 3:36 AM, Harald Arnesen wrote: > > I have no idea if such a thing exists (and that is not my point). You > > were not aware of any standalone JS interpreters, I showed you that they > > exist - although not for DOS. > That is the whole point, after all we ARE talking (Free)DOS here... > Ralf Lack of Javascript support is one thing that makes serious web browsing near-impossible on any DOS. There was years ago an attempt at DOSzilla. I once downloaded and had a standalone Javascript interpreter for OS/2 Warp 4. Since OS/2 Warp installation crashed the hard drive in April 2001 and could never again be booted, I was never again able to run any OS/2 software, and was not interested in eComStation and ArcaOS when Linux, FreeBSD and NetBSD were so much better. I had many years of Internet with DR-DOS 7.03. I did later manage to access the internet with FreeDOS, but insufficiency of browser capabilities prevented me from going far in that direction. Has anybody ever done onine banking from (Free or other)DOS? Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] [Freedos-user] Bexome Endorsed By The FSF! Opportunity
> Thanks for the suggestion. I've had conversations with the FSF about > getting FreeDOS listed on their Free Non-GNU Distributions page. It's not > going to happen. > The last time I discussed this with the FSF, the FSF Licensing rep > responded to say (paraphrasing) "But FreeDOS exists to prop up proprietary > DOS applications." > I replied that there's no point in being a "Free DOS" if FreeDOS can't run > DOS programs. But the FSF's view seems to be that if FreeDOS aims to run > proprietary DOS programs, then FreeDOS is basically supporting/endorsing > proprietary software. They stopped responding to emails after that. > Unfortunately, this is not the first time that's happened, so I've given up > trying to get FreeDOS listed on the FSF's page. > Jim Part of free software is that it can be used for anything the user wants, short of terrorist activity? Even an FSF-endorsed version of Linux can be used, with Wine, DOSBox or dosemu, to run proprietary MS-Windows or DOS programs, not to mention a proprietary program for Linux. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] HD graphics in FreeDOS ? Possible?
from Roberto Freaza: -- Type: text/html, Encoding: quoted-printable, Size: 1.4K --] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"; xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40";> Hello everyone? Is it possible to create a 2D game for FreeDOS using high definition? Like 1920x1080? If the answer is Yes, what is the best language to complete the task? Thanks to all,Roberto First thing you need to do when asking such a question is make it more readable, not muddy with HTML codes. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] [Freedos-user] Re: Realtek ethernet not working
--===1222182586782627756== > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="--=_RainLoop_780_397530746.1594175714" > =_RainLoop_780_397530746.1594175714 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > My Realtek 8139 works fine with FreeDOS 1.3rc3, but you may have to try s= > everal PCI slots before=0Ait works.=0A=0AIn autoexec.bat I have something= > like:=0A=0ASET MTCPCFG=3DC:MTCP.CFG=0ASET WATTCP.CFG=3DC:=0ASET PATH=3D%= PATH%;C:MTCP;C:WATTCP=0ALH RTSPKT.COM 0x61=0AMTCPDHCP.EXE=0AM2WATM2WAT.CO= > M=0AJuly 6, 2020 8:23 PM, "haytam.fr--- via Freedos-user" ists.sourceforge.net (mailto:freedos-u...@lists.sourceforge.net?to=3D%22h= > aytam.fr---%20via%20Freedos-user%22%20 >)> wrote:=0A=0Ai tried connecting a laptop with freedos 1.2 to ethernet = > , well my router showed that there is an ethernet connection , but freedo= > s didnt connect even with fdnet installed=20! I actually connected to the internet from DR-DOS 7.03 and FreeDOS when I had Realtek 8139 ethernet. But with the newer computer, I don't know if I can connect with Realtek 8111E or 8168. I downloaded something but don't really know if I can make it work: total 856 -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 127132 Mar 31 2016 0001-DASHPXE_200.zip -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 60684 Mar 31 2016 0002-RSET8168_124.zip -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 39949 Mar 31 2016 0002-RTGBND2.152_EXE68.zip -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 35764 Mar 31 2016 0002-RTGBND2.152_EXE_Dash.zip -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 109882 Mar 31 2016 0004-RtkUndiDxe.2.035.2015.03.30_signed.zip -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 186068 Mar 31 2016 0005-RTEGPXE.264.zip -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 193017 Mar 31 2016 0005-RTEGROM.264.zip -rw-r--r-- 1 arlene wheel 107751 May 15 2016 0005-RtkUndiDxe.2.036.2016.04.28_signed.zip Other matter I am curious about is if it is possible to access the internet from an OS that does not have the ethernet driver, using PXE boot. This would be of interest not only for FreeDOS but also for Linux and *BSD. Motherboards now seem to support PXE. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] [Freedos-user] Re: Realtek ethernet not working
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="b1_0R7RabozIVHdnNoZCu4e6Ke6Mc4kb1jydqQWRlR1w4" > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 > i tried connecting a laptop with freedos 1.2 to ethernet , well my router > showed that there is an ethernet connection , but freedos didnt connect even > with fdnet installed ! I had a difficult time quoting your message, or part, with nonworking mouse in this old version of NetBSD. I believe I can also not get my Realtek Ethernet to work with (Free or other)DOS. NetBSD OK. Linux also OK. Motherboard manufacturers have largely quit supporting DOS. I have wondered if you can set up something to boot by PXE if motherboard has such support in the BIOS or UEFI (but (Free or other)DOS can not understand UEFI). In DOS, much hardware is supported by the BIOS rather than OS-specific drivers. Let any reader on this list correct me if I'm wrong on this issue. Regarding the ugly multipart/alternative format, my experience with mobile phone apps is that very few email apps can send plain text without HTML attachment. Normally I don't CC to the individual sender on this list, but I am honoring your Reply-To: header. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Large Partitions in FreeDOS.
> >> support still is larger and slower than a 386 kernel on 386, so > >> you are just needlessly tempting 386+ owners to run extremely > >> retro-compatible, less optimized kernels ;-) Also, FAT32 is not > >> just a module which could easily be unloaded, it is the entire > >> set of MS DOS 7.10 compatibility things compared to MS DOS 5/6 > >> and using 8086 FAT32 kernels wastes a lot of memory on the 99.99% > >> of PC-XT which have less than 2 GB disk size, while using 8086 > >> kernels of any type on 386 or newer CPU is generally not cool. > > Oh, I just meant for the 8086 kernel. > > And yes, without that being the intent prior to creating the support for > > FAT32, it would probably be a major pain to restructure it into an > > easily loaded/unloaded driver. > some facts, from my head, and 19 years old. your exact mileage may vary, > depending on compiler, 86 or 386, but the general outline should be > still correct. > FAT16, FAT12 and FAT32 code are the mostly the same; there is no separate > FAT32 driver. there is some code for FAT32 where FAT32 is really > different from FAT16/FAT12. > most of the size increase (~3,5 K) is because a CLUSTER is no longer > 16 bit, but 32 bit as required for FAT32, so the code can be used for > both FAT16 and FAT32. > some size increase (~1,5 K) comes from actual FAT32 specifics, that at > least theoretically could be unloaded. > a hugely better investment of programmer time would be to teach FreeCOm > to swap to disk (instead of swap to XMS), reusing the code for XMSSwap. > probably easier, and easier to debug (it's a mostly normal program) > for the benifit of 60+K instead of ~1K. > still, my personal opinion remains: > if a virtual PC allows 8086 CPUs, it should give them 256 KB memory > and at most 20 MB disk space and at most 8 MHz performance. > 8086 PC's are museum pieces, and should be running MSDOS 2.01 or > whatever they happen to have installed. > Tom [Ehlert] I took a computer course at now-defunct Kentucky Polytechnic Institute (KPI) in 1990. They used 8086 PCs with 30 MB hard drives and MS-DOS 3.31; 640 KB, or was it 1 MB, RAM. So why should a virtual PC be limited to 256 KB memory and 20 MB disk space, if indeed an 8086 or 8088 PC is really worth emulating? First PC I had was 386 SX CPU with 40 MB MFM hard drive; OS was MS-DOS 4.01. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Large Partitions in FreeDOS.
> > Yes, Maybe. We will have to see if demand dictates an additional > > BOOT diskette. > Let's face it, people will try the floppy distro on old, but > less than 35 years old PC, create FAT32 partitions because > their disk size asks for that, fail to format them, say only > to themselves that FreeDOS is crap and go back to dosbox :-( > So thinking about it again, the whole idea of trying to make > the complete distro SORT OF 8086 compatible is much worse than > telling 8086 users to boot from some special 8086 floppy, use > that special 8086 FreeCOM and special 8086 UNZIP and see how > far they can get - WITHOUT introducing any horrible pitfalls > such as missing 386 drivers and FAT32 support to the floppy > distro. The oldest computer with 1.44 MB drive I have seen so > far was a 286 or 386 and it is too long ago to remember which. > And it is generally hard for anybody with even slightly less > ancient hardware to even create 360k or 720k boot disks which > would work on the corresponding ancient drives: 1.44 MB drives > make more narrow, delicate magnetic zones, but READ 720k okay. > Good morning, Eric I just had the thought of whether FreeDOS could be installed from a floppy image not written to an actual floppy disk. I have done that with NetBSD, also used such an image (40 MB), to boot a NetBSD installation when the first partition on the hard disk could not boot normally due to some quirk or error in the hard disk. I used grub4dos, am sure if it would work on any CPU < 386, think it likely would not. Now that old NetBSD installation, 5.1_STABLE, now well outdated, will not go through the boot on my present motherboard. It's been years since I last used grub4dos, or PLOP boot manager (plop.at). I believe grub2 and syslinux, not to mention UEFI, have superseded grub4dos. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] [Freedos-user] HP laptop touchpad
>From Dale E. Sterner: > I've had problem getting cutemouse to work on some PCs. > Try msmouse that is what I use when cutemouse doesn't > work. As far as usb goes check your bios setting, there is > often a bios setting for legacy OS so you can plug stuff > into a usb port and it converts to ps2. You mean you can plug a USB mouse (or keyboard?) into a USB port, with no hardware adapter, and FreeDOS will see it as PS/2? Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Do FreeDOS in the Cloud
Excerpt from Jerome Shidel: > Requires only one local or remote machine running Linux and > an internet connection to fetch packages and installer sources. > (only OpenSUSE and Fedora supported at present) > Uses the latest repo packages. > Easily change USB stick sizes. > Support for multi-language package meta-data > NO extra steps for CD ISOs > More Developer Friendly Package Lists > Less tedious and mistake prone. > (Multiple steps eliminated. One command builds an entire release) > A couple more release customization settings > Install media package location validation and adjusting > Easier for a tinkerer to make a custom release > 12x faster and more robust > Support to add additional media types or sizes > Some other minor stuff > I think, that overall, the new process is far superior to the previous one. > However with all of that being said, I thought that using FreeDOS to build a > FreeDOS release > in 1.2 was really cool. As far as I could tell, except for one person, nobody > had any interest > or used that ability. But, I thought it was awesome. Perhaps, Iâll > resurrect that ability in the > future. > Jerome Making the installation depend on having one of two Linux distributions is severely limiting, I would say a show stopper. Using FreeDOS 1.2 to build a release would be cool, but installation should also be accessible to users-to-be who have no FreeDOS installation to start. Installation of FreeDOS should be feasible from any OS that can read and write FAT32, meaning Linux, Haiku, *BSD, Mac OS, and even MS-Windows. Tom ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit DOS
Snippet from Eric Auer: > OS/2 was a very sensible evolution of the MS DOS > API spirit. So that could be part of the answer. > And there are probably free open OS/2 clones :-) There is a free open OS/2 clone-attempt at osfree.org . They even now have a github site: https://github.com/ErisBlastar/osfree Development proceeds at a crawl. Too little and too late for me; FreeBSD, NetBSD and Haiku are more interesting, not to mention Linux. Tom -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?
from Steve Nickolas: > On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Rugxulo wrote: > > How?? I'm not even aware of any emulators that support such size. > > (Maybe they do, I haven't checked much.) Even 720 kb might be barely > > useful, but I don't know how to make/modify it (without physical > > hardware). > QEMU? MAME? I use 360K floppy disk images all the time in emulators. > -uso. Does the floppy size in an emulator have to match an existing physical floppy disk? With grub4dos, I have used floppy images of 40 MB. I think also syslinux with memdisk can use a floppy image that does not match any actual floppy disk. Tom -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] free-non-gnu-distros.en.html
Excerpt from Rugxulo: > So that's bare minimum (not counting drivers / extensions like XMS or > DPMI or mouse or ...). > But, even then, FSF hates mentioning or linking to proprietary > software, yet FreeDOS is meant to be binary compatible with as much > legacy software as possible. So it's the same problem as ReactOS: > https://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.en.html I read that page, and it looks like a tall order to produce an OS or distro fully free by their criteria. Even mentioning how to get something nonfree disqualifies? >From that page: ReactOS ReactOS is meant as a free binary compatible replacement for Windows. Use with proprietary software and drivers meant for Windows is one of the stated goals of the project. I think that would also be true for FreeDOS, replacing "ReactOS" with "FreeDOS" and "Windows" with "DOS" (such as DR-DOS, MS-DOS and PC-DOS). It would be an awful tall order for FreeDOS to replace all legacy SCSI drivers and other hardware drivers with open-source versions. Part of the purpose of FreeDOS is to use with proprietary DOS software such as business applications (Quattro Pro for DOS, dBASE for DOS) and legacy DOS games. This could be said for DOSBox as well. I have run Borland Quattro Pro and dBASE under both DOSBox and FreeDOS. One of the goals of Wine is to use with proprietary Windows software. Tom -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea??
> I just want to mention that I ported the GUI library FLTK to DOS. FLTK > competes with GTK and has more features than anybody could write from > scratch within years. > Based on the FLTK library I wrote the XFDOS Desktop for FreeDOS. > Anybody is most welcome to use FLTK for DOS to implement GUI based > applications. > https://sourceforge.net/p/fltk-dos/wiki/XFDOS/?page=1 > Georg There is a spreadsheet, teapot, that uses FLTK for graphic version but also has a console version. https://www.syntax-k.de/projekte/teapot/ I don't know if it can be built for FreeDOS, either FLTK version or console version. Tom -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2
Excerpts from Eric Auer: > if Mateusz' repository has "500 MB of packages", then that > would make a good choice for ALL as far as I am concerned: > It easily fits on a CD and you get plenty of DOS stuff :-) > Also, it should fit on most USB sticks as well. Maybe you > could make a list of the LARGEST packages in the repository > and I can tell you which seem okay to omit, if you want to > have the distro small enough to fit even on 512 MB sticks. > That could be a very interesting discussion for my taste :-) Where do you find USB sticks < 4 GB nowadays? Smallest I have is 1 GB. But I think USB sticks started at 128 MB? I think CDs usually have 700 MB capacity nowadays, so we don't want too much of that space to go to waste. It would not be necessary to include everything on the CD in the base installation. > I was wondering if we should also provide a 16 bit version. But > remember: It is almost impossible to boot 16 bit hardware from > CD or from USB stick, so users with such hardware will probably > first install a BASE floppy distro and then use FDNPKG to add > packages manually by individual choice anyway. So it might be > better to include ONLY the 32 bit version of NASM 2.11.08 :-) I think most 16-bit computers had no CD(-ROM) drive? The days when motherboards supported 16-bit CPUs predate USB, as far as I know. So only a small minority of users would use 16-bit NASM. I wonder how a 16-bit computer would exchange data with a modern computer. Maybe Ethernet with FTP or NFS? FreeBSD, NetBSD and most (?) Linux distributions include software for rebuilding the system, so including such software, such as Open Watcom is quite appropriate. Networking and USB are much more critical than in the heyday of (MS-, PC-, DR-)DOS, and FreeDOS 1.2 needs to be reasonably usable for today's computers. So a FreeDOS base system needs to be suitable to current needs rather than the 1990s. Tom -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2
Excerpt from Rugxulo: > > Well maybe it would also be nice to have some BASH, such > > as the DJGPP one - both shell and script language... :-) > Nah. Their Bash is ancient (2.05b), not well-supported by anyone > anymore. Most DJGPP stuff mandatorily has to be cross-compiled > anyways, for various reasons. I just checked in NetBSD pkgsrc and FreeBSD ports, bash is at v4.3. If DJGPP stuff has to be cross-compiled, what OS would it be cross-compilable from, and with what tools? Can FreeDOS base OS and added software be cross-compiled from Linux, NetBSD or FreeBSD, and with what? There is the added problem that 16-bit would be needed, and I believe GCC only compiles for 32- and 64-bit. I suppose a user of Linux, FreeBSD or NetBSD, or even MS-Windows or Mac OS X, could compile, using DOS tools, from DOSBox? Though DOSBox is not as sturdy as straight native DOS, and FreeDOS 1.1 installer would not run from DOSBox (I tried); installer insisted on FreeCOM command interpreter. Just for comparison, there are tools by which ReactOS can be cross-compiled from (quasi)-Unix, which would include Linux and the BSDs, from what I read on ReactOS website (reactos.org). FreeDOS is supposed to support very old, pre-80386 computers capable of running (MS-, DR- or PC-)DOS, hence the need for 16-bit support, but we don't want to hold back users of computers with 32-bit or 64-bit CPUs who could better run 32-bit. In my case, my main use for FreeDOS would be for things like BIOS/UEFI updates and hard-drive diagnostics. My Ethernet is apparently too recent for any packet driver, and from previous posts on FreeDOS lists, my audio (Intel HD audio) has no DOS support. Tom -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2
from Jim Hall:
> I agree that the floppy case is an edge case. I am not too worried
> about that. From how I understand people using FreeDOS, most users are
> either installing FreeDOS on some modern machine ("I just bought a new
> machine, I'll install FreeDOS on the old one") or installing FreeDOS
> in a VM (such as VMWare or VirtualPC or Linux DOSemu). Not too many
> older machines are still around, and in working order.
> Let's remember some CPU history: the '486 was released in the late
> 1990s (discontinued after about 2006 or 2007, I think.) The '386 was
> throughout the 1990s. The '286 was the last pre-CD computer, and that
> was early 1980s to early 1990s. How many twenty-year-old machines are
> still in use by people who aren't avid collectors?
Most older personal computers have had the motherboard go bad, or the hard
drives or hard-drive controller, or the power supply quit, etc.
But I thought the '486 was released around middle 1990, the '386 dates to the
(late?) 1980s.
A CD-ROM drive could be installed to a '286 but was not bootable. I installed
a CD-ROM in a '486 dating to 1995, but that was not bootable.
That '486's hard-drive controllers stopped working, gave severe misreadings on
the hard drive, and eventually the power supply apparently quit, would not
power on.
Repair cost would have been far more than that computer was worth, so all that
was left to do was recycle.
Tom
--
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2
> What I mean is that if your computer is OLDER than 386 > then it does not make much sense to expect CD/DVD at > all, so for such computers, a floppy distro is better. Reading about a floppy distro raises one concern in my mind: reliability and shelf life of floppies. In later years, I could write only a small minority of 3.5" floppies; ability to read outlasted the ability to write. I also noticed that 5.25" floppies appeared to have much better shelf life than 3.5" floppies. I wouldn't have been able to install FreeDOS from floppies because of inability to find sufficient good floppies. FreeDOS outperformed Linux for handling floppies, and Linux did better than FreeBSD or NetBSD. How is the experience of other users with old floppies? Tom -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS
from Jerome E. Shidel Jr.: > Demo Video: > https://www.facebook.com/jshidel/videos/10208019256868395/ > Hopefully, I will have some time tomorrow to finish up FDI and put a > video up of what you see when switching to advanced mode. Video wouldn't play for me because my system has no Adobe Flash support; HTML5 might be OK. I can play many YouTube videos with Mozilla Firefox or SeaMonkey in NetBSD or FreeBSD. I can also play many of the videos that come with spam emails. HTML5 is much more open-source-friendly than Adobe Flash; Adobe has discontinued updates of Flash Player for Linux as of 11.something. Tom -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] mTCP/IP stack by M Brutman is now closed source
from Maarten Vermeulen: > Why are we doing so difficult about something that somebody not want to > do. It is his thing and we have two options: > - using the old one. > - search for another one. > I don't want to be annoying but it is the case. > Maarten > Op 9 sep. 2015 06:57 schreef "Steve Nickolas" : > > On Tue, 8 Sep 2015, Michael Brutman wrote: > > > I am not denying anybody their freedom. People can choose to use what > > they > > > want. I have given people a great set of networking tools that make > > > FreeDOS and other flavors of DOS more useful. You have ranted like a > > > little child because this year the gift was not quite as large as you > > > expected. Shame on you. > > If it makes a difference, the guy sounds almost religiously fundamentalist > > about the whole thing... and has a "gnu.org" e-mail address to boot, so > > prolly *is*... > > -uso. There are at least three options. Third option is to use another open-source OS such as Linux, BSD or Haiku, and get better networking than can be found in FreeDOS, and a more open attitude to open source. Third option is so much more popular that there are not many DOS software developers left. Tom -- Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog! Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools in one place. SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Offering software to the FreeDOS official distribution: Terminal Matrix 8086, DeciMatrix 8086 and QDot 8086
> Hi, I might have been a little bit too enthusiastic before having > actually tried the program. As it is now, I really don't see any use for > it, hence I don't see any reason why it should be included in any > distribution (be it FreeDOS or other). It's not really a game, since we > can hardly call a game something that requires the user to decipher the > source code to be able to even start the application. Terminal Matrix is > currently an interesting showcase at best, not a usable game. > Of course I might be wrong on that, so I eagerly wait for the rest of > the FreeDOS community to prove me wrong. > Anyway, please do not take this the wrong way - I briefly looked at your > source code, and you are obviously skilled in what you do. It's also > obvious that you have put a lot of time and effort in this project, > which is why I can only recommend concentrating this effort into > something that could be truly useful/interesting/fun to FreeDOS users. > The closest thing to Terminal Matrix that comes to mind is the Eliza > simulator for DOS from the eighty's - but Terminal Matrix is yet very > far from it from a usability point of view. > http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/eliza > cheers, > Mateusz I can't see any rationale for including Terminal Matrix with FreeDOS distribution, especially if it is so time-consuming and difficult to figure how to start it, and everything else in FreeDOS works just as well without it. Terminal Matrix could be offered as a separate download for any FreeDOS user who wants it, but let's not put unnecessary bloat into basic FreeDOS distribution. Tom -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 package compilation
I too would like to be able to install FreeDOS from a USB stick or from iso image that could be booted from Syslinux, Grub4DOS or GRUB2. I would likely install FreeDOS to USB stick. I don't know yet how FreeDOS 1.2 will boot; Syslinux has the advantage of being usable to boot other images/partitions as well as FreeDOS, or even a newer, future FreeDOS kernel. I assume only a very small minority of FreeDOS users will use FreeDOS exclusively. Is WATT-32 not included in the upcoming FreeDOS 1.2? Or is some part of WATT-32 (watt-32.net) not open-source? Tom -- Monitor 25 network devices or servers for free with OpManager! OpManager is web-based network management software that monitors network devices and physical & virtual servers, alerts via email & sms for fault. Monitor 25 devices for free with no restriction. Download now http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/292181274;119417398;o ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 package compilation
from Mercury Thirteen: > Yes, they should be. I think they are all mostly the same as the GPL, but > I'm not certain. For the time being, I'll just remove the closed source > packages and leave all the public domain and source-freely-available > programs. If there's an issue, I can always pull more stuff out later on. That makes the most sense. Software that is genuinely open-source should be eligible even if licensing is not GPL. There is difference of opinion in the open-source community on various open-source licenses, and arguments both for and against GPL. FreeBSD is one example of a non-GPL open-source OS (BSD license) but is just as legitimately open-source as FreeDOS. Tom -- Monitor 25 network devices or servers for free with OpManager! OpManager is web-based network management software that monitors network devices and physical & virtual servers, alerts via email & sms for fault. Monitor 25 devices for free with no restriction. Download now http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/292181274;119417398;o ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 boot method?
from Eric Auer: > Hi Tom and Jayden, > as any other DOS, FreeDOS will boot using a boot sector > which is part of a FAT (FAT12, FAT16 or FAT32) partition > on your harddisk, SSD or other type of disk. > Of course boot sectors are also very friendly for being > booted from Syslinux, Lilo, Grub, Grub4dos, the boot menu > of various Windows versions such as Win95, WinNT, WinXP, > as well as various other boot menu systems :-) > To answer Jayden's question, Windows 7 will usually NOT > have a FAT boot partition, so DOS and Windows will have > their home on separate partitions, making it easy to let > them work without interference. With older versions of > Windows, you can install DOS and Win on the same drive > letter: This is possible with a suitable boot menu and > relies on the fact that FreeDOS prefers FreeDOS-specific > names for all system files. For example if there are two > files config.sys and fdconfig.sys, FreeDOS will use the > latter, so the former can be whatever Windows wants :-) > Maybe I also misunderstood the question of Jayden. > Regards, Eric > PS: FreeDOS at the moment only sees partitions on MBR > style partitioned disks, there is no GPT support yet. > You can still boot FreeDOS from GPT disks by using a > diskimage together with a memdisk ramdisk as your C: When you mention Grub, do you mean Grub legacy (0.97) or Grub2? Grub2 seemingly can't boot a FreeDOS kernel as Grub4dos can. Regarding the diskimage together with a memdisk ramdisk as C:, which is the boot disk, and how big can the diskimage and ramdisk be? Would the diskimage be floppy or hard disk? I could use a USB stick for additional disk space, would have to be connected at boot time and would be treated as a fixed disk as far as I could tell. Tom -- 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 boot method?
There was a recent discussion on the upcoming FreeDOS 1.2, my question is how will it boot. Will it use Syslinux as FreeDOS 1.1 did, or will it boot directly from DOS kernel? Or maybe some other boot chooser? Tom -- 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] mtcp and 16 bit fdnpkg
from Rugxulo and my previous post: > > On Mar 18, 2015 11:32 PM, "Thomas Mueller" wrote: > > When the first FreeDOS package installer/updater came out, > > it messed up on my system. > > I hope you can do better! > Always back up important files. > > Many DOS software links in recent years have been no good > > as DOS software development declines. > The main problem is probably unclear (or bad) licensing. You could also say > that web hosts and popular mirrors need to be easier to contribute to. > > As newer Ethernet chips no longer come with packet drivers > > for DOS, that makes it much more difficult to use mtcp > > or anything for DOS-based (inter)networking. > Bug the manufacturers. Or pay them. Or port it over from FreeBSD or > whatever. Yeah, it's a long shot, but there's only so many ways to make it > work. > > That's why I never downloaded mtcp or Glenn McCorkle's > > latest Arachne, wouldn't be able to use it. > Again, the easiest answer to all of the above is to use a VM like > VirtualBox or QEMU. You don't have to worry about hosing your system with > buggy programs, everything is self-contained and easy to replicate and > backup, and packet drivers do work there. I don't think seriously that I will ever be in a position to use or test a FreeDOS package installer/updater. I'd really like to see if I can run FreeDOS or other OS that can't connect by Ethernet, if I can boot by PXE and access the intranet and internet that way. By the way, I see that Net-Tamer shareware internet suite is still available for download, same version as in 1999. I can't see how such old internet software can still be seriously useful (PPP dialup only), even Netscape or MS Internet Explorer from that time would be of very limited functionality. Dave Colston should have released Net-Tamer to open source years ago, now is too late to matter. Tom -- 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] mtcp and 16 bit fdnpkg
from sparky4: > since nobody is going to make the 16 bit port of fdnpkg then i will do it! > also mburtman said that he will most likely not release any newer versions of > mtcp > I am very sad/mad about this! When the first FreeDOS package installer/updater came out, it messed up on my system. I hope you can do better! Many DOS software links in recent years have been no good as DOS software development declines. As newer Ethernet chips no longer come with packet drivers for DOS, that makes it much more difficult to use mtcp or anything for DOS-based (inter)networking. That's why I never downloaded mtcp or Glenn McCorkle's latest Arachne, wouldn't be able to use it. Tom -- 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] Instituting a vetting process for FreeDOS software
Too much to quote here regarding BASIC interpreters and compilers, but one BASIC compiler I remember is Microsoft BASIC Professional Development System for DOS. I don't think this is available any more, it was closed-source proprietary, clearly not a candidate for inclusion in FreeDOS, but of historical interest. Microsoft quit DOS long ago and went to Visual BASIC for Windows, I've lost track of the current status of MS BASIC on Windows. Tom -- 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
from Sparky4: > 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 I thought of that, a 32-bit version of FreeDOS could take ideas/features from OS/2 and eComStation. I saw OS/2 as like a much-enhanced 32-bit DOS. On osfree.org, it looks like progress is minimal, like watching grass grow at the South Pole. I ran OS/2 from v1.3, the last 16-bit version, to Warp 4 with fixpack 12 when during the single-digit days of April 2001, following a crash/freeze, CHKDSK, running automatically, ran amok and trashed the hard-drive data. I was never again able to boot OS/2 even with the installation floppies. Since then, Linux, FreeBSD and NetBSD have, as far as I can see, greatly overtaken eComStation in hardware support and functionality. Even if FreeDOS-32 and OSFree could join forces, there would be a lot of catching up to do. Tom -- 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] Working on FreeDOS 1.2
One thing I'd like to see in the next FreeDOS is a better installer. Installer should be writable to a USB stick or be bootable and runnable from a disk image; there is a rather outdated FreeDOS runnable quasi-floppy image on the System Rescue CD, though this image has no installer. I would like to see an installer (not necessarily bootable) that could run from Linux or FreeBSD, since many computer users these days have no DOS system, and running from Linux or FreeBSD would give the user more control than booting FreeDOS and not knowing which partition or disk is which. I have big hard drives, 3 TB or bigger, partitioned GPT, so the only place I could install FreeDOS to is a USB stick. Even on a modern system, FreeDOS can be useful for hardware diagnostic tools or BIOS/UEFI flash update. Tom -- 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] Getting started
Excerpt from Eddie Anderson: > Because FreeDOS lacks MouseKeys functionality (and because my > PCs are old (and no longer reliably support mice)), I had to stop > using many old programs for many years. Then I found DOSBox on > Linux. Joy. > MouseKeys let me use the keyboard to input mouse movements, > clicks, drags, etc. And DOSBox let me run DOS pgms. So I could > play 1830 and MoO again. Even Win3.11 works (though the X-axis > mouse coordinates seem to be doubled). > Sadly, none of that helps DOS users. And I often read in the > FreeDOS lists about users having problems getting USB mice to work > with FreeDOS on some PCs. That may force FreeDOS users to try to > use other types of mice. > But PCs with serial ports, PS/2 mouse ports, or dedicated mouse > ports seem to become scarcer every year. MouseKeys functionality > for FreeDOS would circumvent many of these problems. Many motherboards nowadays have a single PS/2 port than can be used for a mouse or keyboard but not both simultaneously. I know that from frequenting tigerdirect.com , also motherboard manufacturers' websites such as asrock.com and us.msi.com . I too have had USB mouse fail to work on FreeDOS. Now my difficulty is getting a bootable installation of FreeDOS 1.1. USB stick is the only way; FreeDOS can't access SATA hard drive with GPT. I boot FreeDOS from another USB stick using grub4dos but would rather have something work with Syslinux as I once did, but the USB stick itself went bad, actually came apart physically. That way, I could use the USB stick to boot other things like grub4dos, grub2, and other OS installations. I can run (Borland) Quattro 5 and dBASE IV 1.5 (for DOS) from DOSBox, but prefer to migrate spreadsheet applications to Gnumeric. Tom -- Infragistics Professional Build stunning WinForms apps today! Reboot your WinForms applications with our WinForms controls. Build a bridge from your legacy apps to the future. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=153845071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] [Freedos-user] networking library for c++14
> https://isocpp.org/std/status � > according to this, c++ is supposed to get a networking library. > it might be from boost, but I don't know. - > Jim Michaels Question is how networking will be implemented in FreeDOS. There is also the problem of lack of DOS drivers for most wireless and newer Ethernet adapters. Tom -- Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS JetDirect driver (was: Getting started)
from Rugxulo: > DJGPP has no "Windows version". It's a pure DOS compiler only. There > is no Windows support. None is in the works. None was ever made. (I'm > aware of very very small and obscure and incomplete hacks like RSXNT, > but those don't count. Or at least haven't counted, even unofficially, > since 15 years ago.) The only thing "Windows" about DJGPP is its > occasional use on NTVDM (with its buggy DPMI server) on such OSes as > WinXP or (much less functionally) later versions. > "Still under development" ... hardly. There is no work towards Windows > support at all. Volunteers are few. There is no PE/COFF support. It > does not access any Windows APIs directly. There is no support for > (PE/COFF) .DLLs. It was not supposed to. The whole idea of DPMI was to > extend DOS and play well in both native DOS and Windows and other > compatibles (e.g. OS/2). Obviously Windows doesn't care about that > anymore. > DJGPP cannot currently even pretend to care about Windows. It's still > "DOS only". I'm not saying it isn't possible, of course, and who knows > what people have in mind. But as of right now it's just not there, not > even a little. Why should DJGPP care about Windows? That's what MinGW and Cygwin are all about. One question this thread raises about printing is, some printers require a proprietary binary plugin to be functional. Case in point is HP LaserJet M1212nf MFP. Would this be far beyond the capability of FreeDOS? Tom -- Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] [Freedos-user] Load file sys driver in dconfig.sys?
from Rugxulo: > I don't know if drive letter assignment is configurable. I'd doubt it. > You might?? be able to adjust some things with certain (third-party?) > tools, but I'm not sure offhand if that's a reasonable expectation. > > What is available for reading NTFS used in WXP, W7? > I think you're barking up the wrong tree. But also I'm not experienced > enough in trying all the various file systems and drivers and OSes. So > maybe I am the wrong person to be replying here. I don't want to > discourage you, just make sure you're asking the right questions. > I just think it's not well-supported, if at all, to read foreign file > systems under DOS. There isn't a lot of active work in that area. I > think it's not a priority. In other words, it's probably more > reasonable (or at least more commonly accepted) to use a proper OS > with proper first-party support for that file system, even if only to > transfer the relevant data to a more suitable disk (or file system) > for whatever OS you're trying to run (e.g. FAT32 for FreeDOS). > Even Linux only "mostly" supports NTFS (r/w) except for compression > and encryption, last I heard. FreeBSD might have support for HPFS too, > but it may be readonly. > In other words, it's not a good first choice to try to use FreeDOS to > read all these other systems. I have no idea if eComStation supports > FAT32 nowadays (probably), but if you want to use HPFS (full time, not > just once or twice, read + write), that OS would be my first choice. > And of course if you don't want to use the obvious modern Windows for > NTFS (5.x or whatever), you're stuck with Linux or FreeBSD or similar. > I'm not sure other tools are as trustworthy. Make sure you have > backups before doing anything heavy-duty! > If you can bootup a suitable foreign OS and migrate the data to FAT32, > "most" OSes (even latest eCS, presumably) can access it (read + > write), and you can boot up FreeDOS and access it (full-time) with no > problems. That is presumably the "preferred" solution here. Maybe not > what you want to hear, but we can't have everything. :-/ I don't think FreeBSD, or any other BSD, ever had HPFS support, and I just looked again for FreeBSD, not even read-only. If I had anything on HPFS, I suppose I'd use Linux to copy anything I wanted to save. OS/2 was just getting an experimental third-party driver for FAT32 back in 2001; I never got to use it. FAT32 is now good as a lingua franca file system for exchanging data between various OSes but is very limited on ability to use large partitions: not nearly as good as NTFS or Linux or BSD file systems. Now EXFAT has been developed to remedy FAT32's inadequacy for large partitions. Not having a file system better than FAT32 is a big limiting factor for FreeDOS and ReactOS, at least for doing big things, perhaps even rebuilding the OS from source. Tom -- Is your legacy SCM system holding you back? Join Perforce May 7 to find out: • 3 signs your SCM is hindering your productivity • Requirements for releasing software faster • Expert tips and advice for migrating your SCM now http://p.sf.net/sfu/perforce ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Do not use any code from ms-dos release!
from Charles Belhemeur: > Well hopefully the multi-cores are true multi-taskers and you're > getting the time savings you thing you are. You are definitely wasting > time with the swapping function on single core CPUs. Its faster in > single cores to just complete one task at a time, let a routines > finish before starting another one. > Some of you seem inexperienced at the early attempts to multi-task on > Intel chips. Nothing but fun in that era! > An old rule of thumb, run DOS apps under DOS, run Windows apps under > Windows OS, OS/2 apps under OS/2 and so on. Emulators, shells or > cross platform support is just looking for bugs! (snip) OS/2 Warp 3 and 4, and even 2.x, did a good job running DOS apps but could not run some DOS apps that required real mode, such as DOSBOOT in NetBSD or LOADLIN for booting Linux from DOS. Then, during the single-digit days of April 2001, after freezing and requiring reboot by Reset button, CHKDSK, which ran automatically, ran amok and trashed my installation and other hard-drive data. I was never again able to boot any OS/2 after that, even from maintenance/installation floppies. Now I believe both Linux and FreeBSD have overtaken OS/2 and eComStation in hardware support. Tom -- Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Do not use any code from ms-dos release!
Excerpt from Rugxulo: > DOS on modern IBM PC clones have too many hardware compatibility > issues: power management, lack of networking (almost no packet > drivers), no soundcard drivers (or even static libs), almost no USB > support. It doesn't look like most hardware companies care enough to > waste time on it. Heck, half the time they don't seem to even properly > support Linux. And DJGPP isn't exactly brimming with enthusiastic new > users or tons of ports from Linux maintainers either. > So expecting anything beyond what we've already got is probably naive > (sadly). They probably (rightly? hope not!) think that DOS will really > disappear once the BIOS is totally replaced by UEFI in all new OEM > shipments. I know some people think some partial BIOS compatibility > will be available, but I'm very skeptical. > In other words, it's complicated! Now I have modern computer hardware, and can't even successfully install FreeDOS. I once succeeded on a 4 GB USB stick, Ativa, twist-turn style, but that went bad, actually came apart physically. This installation could read the header/title of a CD but no more in a SATA DVD-RW drive. I also had a FreeDOS installation on a 341 MB IDE hard drive but can no longer read that hard drive, now using Sabrent USB 2.0 enclosure. I am able to read two other old IDE hard drives in that enclosure. But there is hope, considering that the FreeDOS image on System Rescue CD boots and runs, at least if I use no memory manager. FreeDOS can read and write to USB drive with FAT16 or FAT32 file system thanks to BIOS/UEFI support, but only as a fixed disk: only when in port at boot time, and no good when changing USB sticks. FreeDOS can't read my hard drive because of lack of support for GPT. I can't access Ethernet or wi-fi through FreeDOS at all, at least not yet. I haven't downloaded Glenn McCorkle's March 2013 update of Arachne for DOS. Even if I could make the network work in FreeDOS, lack of support for Javascript or HTTPS makes Arachne useful just as a curiosity; so many more functional browsers available for Linux and BSD. I wonder about the possibility of making hardware work in FreeDOS through UEFI initializing the devices, or Ethernet through PXE boot. I believe DJGPP is pretty much lame-duck now. I'd guess that, even with UEFI replacing legacy BIOS, bootable USB sticks with MBR partitioning will still be bootable, subject to the underlyimg OS being otherwise compatible with the hardware. Tom -- Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready Get Started Now And Turn Your Intranet Into A Collaboration Platform http://p.sf.net/sfu/ExoPlatform ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] (no subject)
> hi folks... > > would someone please change the freedos download page so it includes a > > rawrite-compatible floppy image download? there are needs for that, me being > one > of them. floppies are not dead. also, you can make a bootable cd with any cd > > burning software using a rawrite-compatible floppy image (.img). > > thanks. > > Jim Michaels > I thought there already was a floppy-image download, but it would be used to install from a CD, especially for users with nonbootable CD. But I would like an image that could be booted from grub4dos or grub2 and used for installing FreeDOS without burning to CD. It would also be nice to be able to install or update FreeDOS from Linux or BSD. Many FreeDOS users nowadays would not use FreeDOS as their only or primary OS. If my message formatting is faulty, it might be because I am on a strange console, newcons in FreeBSD-current. Regarding floppies, most of my 3.5" floppies were no longer writable though many were still readable. My 5.25" floppies tended to do better. Tom -- Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
