Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:40 AM Liam Proven  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 at 19:29, Robert Riebisch  wrote:
>
> > Just to add: Virtual PC 2004 SP1 and Virtual PC 2007) were/are available
> > as a free download from Microsoft, but didn't/doesn't include any DOS
> > version.
>
> That's true.
>
> I suspect that the thinking was that if you're running on a PC, then
> you already have a PC OS, by definition. This is not true of Mac
> users, obviously.

Old Windows (e.g. 7) used to let you make a system floppy (using
DISKCOPY.DLL, which has a bundled MS EBD disk or whatever). RUFUS will
optionally use this if you don't choose FreeDOS. (Yes, RUFUS supports
the LiveCD but also has a very minimal FreeDOS bundled already.) I
don't think that's available in Windows 10 or newer anymore.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Liam Proven]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 at 19:29, Robert Riebisch  wrote:
>
> Did Microsoft make Virtual PC 2004 and 2007 or was it Connectix?
> What does the sticker on the box say? Microsoft or Connectix? :-p

OK, conceded.

> Just to add: Virtual PC 2004 SP1 and Virtual PC 2007) were/are available
> as a free download from Microsoft, but didn't/doesn't include any DOS
> version.

That's true.

I suspect that the thinking was that if you're running on a PC, then
you already have a PC OS, by definition. This is not true of Mac
users, obviously.

I extracted the PC DOS 2000 image from Mac VirtualPC, converted it to
VBox format, and blogged about it. It's here:
https://liam-on-linux.livejournal.com/76183.html

-- 
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Louis Santillan]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 8:34 AM Bret Johnson  wrote:

> > RHV is based on oVirt which is based on KVM plus qemu & libvirt &
> > lots of other bits. It'll run DOS but you might have jump through
> > hoops (learn virsh and other tools) to get it installed.
> >
> > BHyve, at least as in TrueNAS Core and OSX/Mac OS before M1 will
> > also run DOS.
> >
> > I think it's at least worth documenting DOS on TrueNAS Core, TrueNAS
> > Scale, Proxmox, Unraid, Linux+Cockpit (which should look like KVM)
> > and maybe Xen/XCP-NG as well as popular x86 emulators for RPi if
> > feasible.


>
Do you actually have any of these installed and working?
>

Apologies. Got busy with work. I have more time this week.

But, definitely, I have VMware ESXi/vSphere up and it can do nested virt.
I have TrueNAS Core (virtualized) up as well but getting TrueNAS Core,
TrueNAS Scale, Proxmox, Unraid, Linux+Cockpit, XCP-NG on BM should be easy
though bit tedious and time consuming.  I've done RHV/oVirt before, not my
favorite and probably more prevalent in Enterprise and Professional
environments rather than someone who might be interested in FreeDOS.

Contact me offline w/a testing plan or directions of what you're looking
for me to accomplish.



>
> I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle this moving forward.  At a
> minimum, we should move it to its own thread -- and maybe it doesn't even
> belong in a FreeDOS thread.  But I'm sure several people in here would be
> interested (I'm pretty sure at least Jim would be VERY interested).
>
> Just FYI, it doesn't seem possible to create a generic "I'm running in a
> VM of some sort" test.  You need to test for each VM individually, and they
> all do different things that may or may not allow you to detect them.  Of
> course, that means you need to know about every possible VM out there both
> now and in the future (and I've never even heard of some of those you
> mentioned above before now).  I've got about six different methods I've
> found to detect various VMs (some through research on the Internet and some
> though experimentation).  In some VMs several of the methods work and in
> other VMs none of them work (at least not reliably).  In can also vary
> depending on whether you're using and old or new version of the VM.
>
> There are also cases where there is "cross-linking" between the VMs,
> especially in Linux.  E.g., once you install KVM (Kernel Virtual Machine)
> in Linux it seems to "infect" the other VMs so it's hard to tell them apart
> (they seem to look like KVM).
>
> If you actually have some of these installed and working, I can "tweak up"
> a version of ISLOADED so you can do some testing for me (that's what I've
> been working on for the last several days in my copious free time).  Are
> you interested?
>
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Liam,

>> The one made by Microsoft?
> 
> Two points of order: wrong name and wrong tense.
> 
> VirtualPC was made by Connectix, and was acquired by Microsoft.

Did Microsoft make Virtual PC 2004 and 2007 or was it Connectix?
What does the sticker on the box say? Microsoft or Connectix? :-p

> Second, it's not made any longer. It was discontinued. Hyper-V uses

Sure, I forget "was".

>> I doubt, any version of VPC included FreeDOS, but feel free to prove me
>> wrong. :-)
> 
> The final versions of VirtualPC shipped with IBM PC DOS. Specifically,
> PC DOS 2000, which means PC DOS 7.01 with Y2K fixes.

Just to add: Virtual PC 2004 SP1 and Virtual PC 2007) were/are available
as a free download from Microsoft, but didn't/doesn't include any DOS
version.

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] Bonus/Devel CD

[Liam Proven]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 21:16, Robert Riebisch  wrote:
>
> What VPC are we talking about?
> VPC as in Virtual PC?

I thought not. I would guess this:

https://github.com/neri/vpc

Given that we are specifically discussing VMs and emulators then using
an ambiguous abbreviation would be foolhardy, so I presumed that VPC
meant a separate one, so I Googled.

> The one made by Microsoft?

Two points of order: wrong name and wrong tense.

VirtualPC was made by Connectix, and was acquired by Microsoft.

Second, it's not made any longer. It was discontinued. Hyper-V uses
VirtualPC-derived disk formats, device emulation and so on, but the
core CPU emulation tech is no longer needed as all modern PC CPUs can
do that in hardware.

> I doubt, any version of VPC included FreeDOS, but feel free to prove me
> wrong. :-)

The final versions of VirtualPC shipped with IBM PC DOS. Specifically,
PC DOS 2000, which means PC DOS 7.01 with Y2K fixes.

-- 
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Liam Proven]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 16:28, tom ehlert  wrote:
>
> how does detecting VirtualBox help you decide to use which adapter is
> present?

I find this question very surprising.

The answer is very clear and I thought obvious: if you're running in
VBox, then there are only 5 possible models of NIC. This makes the
detection logic much simpler.

-- 
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Liam Proven]

On Tue, 25 Oct 2022 at 23:55, Rugxulo  wrote:
>
> >   DOSEmu / DOSEmu2
>
> Is this available in any repos? I'm very naive. Didn't the original
> used to be in "multiverse"? I'm not sure it's there anymore.

DOSemu used to be in Debian and Ubuntu, but it's been dropped now.

DOSemu 1 used V86 mode, a feature on x86-32. It ran fine on 64-bit
machines but I *think* only in 32-bit mode, because V86 mode has been
removed from x86-64.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_8086_mode

I have successfully run DOSemu 1 on ChromeOS, though, in its Debian
container. It worked and I was able to install MS Word 5.5 but it was
very unstable and crashed when I tried to save a file.

DOSemu2 works well and is already more stable. I have it on Ubuntu on
several machines, but I don't use it heavily. Ubuntu is 64-bit only
now and has been for some years. I have not tested DOSemu2 on 32-bit
and I am not sure if it will even install. I don't have any 32-bit
machines still in live use, although there are a couple of very old
laptops that I occasionally play with. 64-bit PC kit has been around
for very nearly 20 years now  (AMG Sledgehammer was launched in 2003)
and 32-bit only machines are getting very old.

> I still haven't tried DOSEMU2 yet, but it uses its own modified FDPP
> (DOS) kernel, right?

Yes it does, but in theory it can run other DOSes as well. The
documentation is currently very sketchy and I've not managed to get
its scripts to install other DOSes to work. The script for FreeDOS
only supports up to 1.2 last time I looked, and the script is broken
and won't install.

A friend of mine reported success though.

> It has a PPA or whatever, not sure.

Yes it does. I am using it successfully on Ubuntu 22.04. I recommend
it; it works well, it's fast, and it seems more stable than v1 was
towards the end. Host integration is good but needs more manual setup
than in v1.

>  (This does
> supposedly support VT-X now.

So I understand from attending a talk by one of the developers at FOSDEM.

>  They used to support other methods, but
> I'm not sure if that's still supported.

Don't know. However Intel VT is also some 15Y old now and is ubiquitous.

> Also, they might be 64-bit
> host only, not sure.

A good question. I can't readily tell. There are no 32-bit binaries
available, I just checked.

> So Hyper-V does actually support DOS? From what I read (years ago), I
> wasn't sure. (Back then it was 64-bit Pro VT-X only.)

Define "support".

It should be able to _boot_ DOS but there will be little to no host
integration, just as there isn't on VirtualBox.  I haven't tried (I
don't run Windows routinely on anything) but I'm pretty confident that
the old Connectix DOS guest additions (which were very good) won't
work, although Hyper-V descends from Connectix VirtualPC.

> This is also
> what WSL2 supposedly uses behind the scenes.

Correct.

> >   KVM
>
> This is just QEMU using VT-X, right?

Approximately right.

KVM can use both Intel VT-X and AMD-V. It uses QEMU tools and formats
to set up virtual disks and things but it's not running QEMU. I
usually use VMM or GNOME Boxes to control it. I do not like either
very much.

> >   Parallels
>
> Mac?

Yes.

> >   vDOS
>
> Wengier did some work on VDOSPlus, I thought (for apps, not games,
> with LFNs and better printing support).

I have tried both vDOS and vDOS Plus.

I wrote it up here:
https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/28/friday_foss_fest_running_dos/

> >   BHyve
>
> This was created for FreeBSD and first released in 10.0, IIRC. It
> requires a 2010 Intel (or newer) with VT-X (and EPT).

And AMD-V I believe. I am exploring FreeBSD more and more but I've not
tried this yet.

> IIRC, they
> "mostly" wanted to run other versions of BSD, but there was partial
> effort to get other OSes (even with a BIOS) running.

Yes. Now Linux guests are supported too and FreeBSD runs on
Firecracker, a formerly-Linux-only VM.
https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/19/freebsd_comes_to_amazons_lightweight/

> Honestly, I never
> tried it, but it sounded interesting. (Wasn't the Mac port called
> xhyve?)

I think so. MacOS now has its own built-in hypervisor though.
Impressively, the ARM versions can do Rosetta2 x86-64→ARM64
translation *inside Linux guests*.

> Apparently it can also run x64 Windows via UEFI. (sysutils/grub2-bhyve
> is used for running some other *nixes.)

Yup. It is quite mature now. It's supporter on TrueNAS and can run
Windows VMs inside a NAS OS!

> DOSEMU used to allow MS- or DR- or FD-, but I had weakly thought
> DOSEMU2 required its own FreeDOS fork called FDPP.

*Required*, no.  Bundled, yes. Others are supported.

> Yes, I agree that VMs are more common for FreeDOS users nowadays,
> especially with no more BIOS or CSM on new machines.

There are some Linux distros out there that aim mainly at running DOS
VMs. As a FOSS OS that can't run natively on modern PCs and needs to
run on top of another OS, ISTM that it is vital for FreeDOS to support
running on top of another FOSS 

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Danilo Pecher]

Hi all,

I say the most important thing first - I'm not very keen on a Live
DVD. One of the things that severely goes on my man-mammaries is that
every Linux, BSD and whatnot nears the 1GB mark, when a basic system
install could easily fit in a 300MB image. I don't think we have too
many casual users using FreeDOS anyway. If you run this on actual
hardware, you kept that around for a reason and know what you're
doing, and it is the same for people who configure a VM or go through
a qEmu install to run FreeDOS. So I think the best idea is to have an
install medium with the base system an close-to-system addons (like
the network packages, archivers etc) and move other things to a
Addon-CD and a Devel-CD, or just call it Applications-CD and
Developer-CD, whatever floats your boat.

cheers, Danilo

On Sun, 23 Oct 2022 at 20:46, Jerome Shidel  wrote:
>
> Although there has not been a lot of feed back on what to do with the 
> excessively (nearly 1GB) BonusCD in T2210, I think the majority of feedback 
> has been in favor of splitting off the development packages from the BonusCD 
> on to their own DevelCD.
>
> And, we should do this instead of dropping packages for several reasons. The 
> main reason is for the convenience of users who may be on older hardware or 
> without network support. Those users might experience some difficulty getting 
> all of the programs they need into their “DOS” machine.
>
> It has also been suggested to provide a “Developer Oriented” release of 
> FreeDOS. One that is specifically geared towards DOS development.
>
> Another suggestion has been to just slim down FreeDOS to basic DOS.  Leaving 
> it up to the user to find, download and install what they want after the OS 
> has been installed.
>
> Personally, I don’t think dropping everything except basic DOS is the way to 
> go. I think doing so would be off-putting to most “New” users. Although they 
> would have a fully functioning DOS, it really would not do much on it’s own. 
> It would require them to go get other software or games and create a usage 
> barrier that most would just uninstall the OS an move on to something else.
>
> Most “modern” operating systems either provide numerous bonus software. They 
> do this by either providing it on their release media or through an easy 
> method of downloading and installing software. There are many examples of 
> this in the Linux world. For example, openSUSE does both. It provides 
> thousands of extra packages on it’s release DVD and also connects to a 
> download center to provide them.
>
> Although the next major version of FDIMPLES will most likely support online 
> repositories, it is being written %100 in assembly and not coming soon. Even 
> once the new version of FDIMPLES is ready, general networking support under 
> FreeDOS is very limited. This leaves us with providing additional packages on 
> the release media for the near future.
>
> I’m unsure of the best solution to the problem.
>
> I don’t think providing a Developer Oriented skew of the OS is a good idea. 
> With the LegacyCD, LiveCD, LiteUSB, FullUSB and Floppy Edition, I think we 
> provide to many OS skews already. Since we want to support a wide range of 
> DOS hardware, we really need to keep the Floppy and CD version around.
>
> We could probably drop the LiteUSB for several reasons. I think it’s direct 
> usage is very limited and most users probably opt for the FullUSB version. 
> Also, every “how-to” and video I’ve seen online that shows how to create a 
> bootable USB stick for FreeDOS uses the LiveCD to create it. However, 
> occasionally, I do see questions on how to write one of the USB media to a 
> flash drive.
>
> We could also probably drop the LegacyCD as well. There is only a very 
> limited range of early hardware that cannot boot the LiveCD. But, it can boot 
> the LegacyCD. That hardware will most likely also have a floppy drive. If 
> their CD drive is supported by the drivers, they could boot using the “Floppy 
> Boot Image” included in the download zip. Once that is done, they can install 
> from CD.
>
> So where does that leave us? I think there are at least two practical 
> solutions at present.
>
> First, split off all development related packages that are on the BonusCD 
> onto a new DevelCD. This would require very little work. The Release Build 
> Environment (RBE) is already capable of creating multiple extra package discs 
> images. However, I will probably want to add some functionality to use 
> specific labels for them. At present, it would generate BonusCD0 and 
> BonusCD1. It will not be hard to update the RBE to use custom labels for the 
> discs. This first solution implies we may eventually have a GamesCD, UtilsCD 
> and others as well. If we go down this path, perhaps we should start 
> separating some other packages on to their own media as well.
>
> The second option is to go big. On this path, we could do away with the 
> BonusCD. We could keep the LiveCD as-is. 

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> Don't forget Hampa Hug's PCE - PC Emulator:
> http://www.hampa.ch/pce/pce-ibmpc.html

It turns out that PCE has a custom BIOS so it's pretty easy to detect.  I was 
thinking it would be set up more like PCem and 86Box which actually use images 
of the original ROMs from the original computers way back when.  They don't use 
a "custom" BIOS the way most VMs do.  PCem and 86Box are VERY difficult to 
detect because of that.

Those two VMs may actually help you with your VGA issues.  I don't know if your 
VGA conundrums are related to the BIOS or the hardware, but since those two VMs 
use the original BIOSs from real hardware they may be more compatible than the 
other VMs.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> Don't forget Hampa Hug's PCE - PC Emulator:
> http://www.hampa.ch/pce/pce-ibmpc.html

I'll experiment with that one too, but it's really hard to detect emulations of 
really old hardware.  You usually need things like PCI and CPUID to detect 
things reliably.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> What VPC are we talking about?
> VPC as in Virtual PC?
> The one made by Microsoft?
> I doubt, any version of VPC included FreeDOS, but feel free to prove
> me wrong. :-)

I might have misspoke there -- I thought it was JPC he was talking about (JPC 
does come with a version of FreeDOS).  VirtualPC (whether the old versions from 
Connectix or the newer ones after Microsoft bought out Connectix) just come 
with a BIOS and you can install any OS on them you want.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Bret,

>   86Box
>   Bochs
>   DOSBox
>   DOSBox-X
>   DOSEmu / DOSEmu2
>   Hyper-V
>   JPC
>   KVM
>   Parallels
>   PCem
>   QEMU
>   vDOS
>   VirtualBox
>   VirtualPC (Connectix)
>   VirtualPC (Microsoft)
>   VMWare

Don't forget Hampa Hug's PCE - PC Emulator:
http://www.hampa.ch/pce/pce-ibmpc.html

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] Bonus/Devel CD

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Bret,

>> VPC uses FreeDOS?? Not sure.
> 
> Yes.

What VPC are we talking about?
VPC as in Virtual PC?
The one made by Microsoft?
I doubt, any version of VPC included FreeDOS, but feel free to prove me
wrong. :-)

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] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> VirtualBox gives you the chance to have 5 different network cards;
> other virtualizers probably similar.

I would know which Ethernet NIC I have configured in VirtualBox.  In VirtualBox 
you can also detect the Ethernet card though PCI, but that's not true in every 
VM.  In addition, just because you can identify the NIC doesn't mean you know 
what packet driver to load -- you still need to have some kind of 
(context-specific) lookup table of some sort.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[tom ehlert]

> One of the main things that started me down this rabbit trail was
> the need to know which Ethernet card is being virtualized in a
> particular VM so I can load the correct packet driver.

> I have a
> single ETHERNET.BAT file I run to install the packet driver, and
> since detecting which network card is installed is a tricky
> proposition I do it indirectly by detecting the VM (or lack of VM if I'm 
> running on real hardware).

VirtualBox gives you the chance to have 5 different network cards;
other virtualizers probably similar.

how does detecting VirtualBox help you decide to use which adapter is
present?

as said before, PCI detection is used by everybody else, and should
also be good enough for you

Tom




___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> Since what you need to know is which Ethernet card is being
> virtualized, perhaps it would be sufficient to simply scan the PCI
> bus to see what class 2 devices reside there?
> ...
> Of course, if the majority of cards for which you need to search are
> non-PCI (e.g. some old ISA stuff) then this wouldn't be suitable at
> all, but if not... hey, maybe it could help?

I actually do need more than the Ethernet card, but that is what started me on 
this trail.  The PCI thing can work for some things _IF_ the VM even 
virtualizes a PCI BIOS (some do and some don't).  There are also some VMs (like 
VMWare) that have their own versions of almost everything so you may not even 
find a "recognized" NIC in the PCI space.

So, your program may work in specific cases but would not be a general-purpose 
solution.  I also recognize my setup and what I'm trying to accomplish is 
pretty unusual.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[tom ehlert]

> One of the main things that started me down this rabbit trail was
> the need to know which Ethernet card is being virtualized in a
> particular VM so I can load the correct packet driver.

ca. 30 years ago PCI enumerating has been invented.


>  I have a
> single ETHERNET.BAT file I run to install the packet driver, and
> since detecting which network card is installed is a tricky
> proposition

it's not at all tricky (if you avoid machines without PCI Bios).

it's pretty much straight forward, and there are a couple of programs
(even somewhere in FreeDOS) implementing 'what network card is
present'. works in VMs and real hardware.

Tom



___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Ralf Quint]

On 10/24/2022 6:38 PM, Bret Johnson wrote:
Anyway, I'm wondering how "involved" FreeDOS should be in the VM world 
(I think in today's world the vast majority of users install DOS under 
a VM rather than on real hardware, though I personally do both). How 
involved in testing/recommending applications (including games) for 
compatibility should FreeDOS actually be, particularly when a VM is 
involved?
To be honest, we should not get involved with ANY VM at all. This will 
just lead us potentially into a deep dark rabbit hole that leads us far 
away from Kansas^H^H^H^H^H^Hthe DOS world.
The goal of FreeDOS is to be MS-DOS 6.0 compatible, so any VM should be 
able to run MS-DOS 6.0, and so should FreeDOS run as well.


Going by the messages either here in the mailing list or the occasional 
post on the Facebok page, it seems the vast majority of compatibilty 
issues are related to support of specific hardware, mainly sound cards 
and network cards. That is absolutely something that is only to be 
solved on side of that VM.


Another possible issue is that of incompatibilities with some memory 
managers included in FreeDOS. And this is a really tricky part, as there 
is very little active participation of the authors in order to properly 
diagnose and fix any such issues that would arise..


All in all, I think venturing too far into the support of VMs is a very 
slippery slope for us, with only a few people actually participating



Ralf




___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 10:27 PM Bret Johnson  wrote:
>
> > Although I never truly needed to know what VM
>
> One of the main things that started me down this rabbit trail was the need to 
> know which Ethernet card is being virtualized in a particular VM so I can 
> load the correct packet driver.  I have a single ETHERNET.BAT file I run to 
> install the packet driver, and since detecting which network card is 
> installed is a tricky proposition I do it indirectly by detecting the VM (or 
> lack of VM if I'm running on real hardware).

I can't remember exactly (would have to check), but I think I just
used BERNDPCI.COM.

> >> DOSBox
> >
> > "Only for games". (Maxes out at 64 MB RAM, meh. "Slow Pentium" is
> > best it can emulate, IIRC.)
>
> No, it can run "real" applications also.  But you're correct that its primary 
> focus is compatibility with games.

You mean via IMGBOOT or whatever? But that hides the whole guest
filesystem aspect. It's still quite limited.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Mercury Thirteen via Freedos-devel]

Since what you need to know is which Ethernet card is being virtualized, 
perhaps it would be sufficient to simply scan the PCI bus to see what class 2 
devices reside there? My ListPCI tool can do just that (as well as some other 
stuff) and I believe Eric Auer's PCISleep may do something similar, albeit 
without the "specificness" my tool offers as far as only listing certain 
devices for which you are looking.

Of course, if the majority of cards for which you need to search are non-PCI 
(e.g. some old ISA stuff) then this wouldn't be suitable at all, but if not... 
hey, maybe it could help? It weighs in at a mere 53 KiB, but maybe this is 
beyond what you wish to spend, space-wise. Feel free to read a little more 
about it [here](https://mercurycoding.com/blog.html?tag=ListPCI).

Hope this helps! :)

Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, October 25th, 2022 at 11:24 PM, Bret Johnson bretj...@juno.com 
wrote:

>> Jerome's V8Power Tools will detect some VMs, IIRC:
>
> Yes, I checked that out. In the version I looked at, it detects 3 different 
> VMs all using the same method (looking for a specific identification string 
> in BIOS memory). That method works with some VMs, but not all.
>
>> Although I never truly needed to know what VM
>
> Sometimes I do. I have my machine set up for lots of different kinds of 
> testing. I have several VMs installed and several different manufacturers and 
> versions of DOS that can be used in them. Some VMs just virtualize the 
> hardware and the BIOS and let you install whatever DOS (or Windows or ...) 
> you want. Others have a virtual DOS already built into them (sometimes based 
> on FreeDOS and sometimes something unique).
>
> One of the main things that started me down this rabbit trail was the need to 
> know which Ethernet card is being virtualized in a particular VM so I can 
> load the correct packet driver. I have a single ETHERNET.BAT file I run to 
> install the packet driver, and since detecting which network card is 
> installed is a tricky proposition I do it indirectly by detecting the VM (or 
> lack of VM if I'm running on real hardware).
>
>> the naive ways to detect (from my limited experience) are
>> a). check DOS version
>
> Can work in some VMs, but mostly not.
>
>> b). check VESA version string
>> c). check BIOS string.
>
> Those are essentially the same method. If VESA is supported in the VM (some 
> do and some don't), the VESA version string is also in BIOS (usually in 
> segment C000h or C800h). The "BIOS string" I think you're referring to is 
> usually somewhere in segment F000h. Again, this only works with some VMs.
>
>> (You could also check the cpu, but that's messy. DOSBox is a "fast
>> 486" DX2 by default, IIRC.)
>
> Some VMs (like PCem and 86Box) will virtualize different kinds of CPU's, so 
> detecting the CPU is not a good method. Also, most VMs will simply "pass 
> through" the host's CPU and report it as their own instead of accurately 
> identifying the virtualized CPU. Some VMs report the CPU accurately, but most 
> don't.
>
>>> DOSBox
>>
>> "Only for games". (Maxes out at 64 MB RAM, meh. "Slow Pentium" is
>> best it can emulate, IIRC.)
>
> No, it can run "real" applications also. But you're correct that its primary 
> focus is compatibility with games.
>
>>> DOSBox-X
>>
>> It's quite interesting (esp. running atop FreeDOS itself). But I
>> haven't tested it too heavily.
>
> Similar in many respects to DOSBox.
>
>> DOSEmu / DOSEmu2
>>
>> Is this available in any repos? I'm very naive. Didn't the original
>> used to be in "multiverse"? I'm not sure it's there anymore.
>
> Not sure about DOSEmu, but I just downloaded and installed DOSEmu2 in the 
> last few weeks in Ubuntu 22.04 (and my Ubuntu is running under Hyper-V in 
> Windows 10).
>
>> I still haven't tried DOSEMU2 yet, but it uses its own modified FDPP
>> (DOS) kernel, right?
>
> It does. I'm not sure exactly what's different between the DOSEmu "FreeDOS" 
> and real FreeDOS, though.
>
>> Hyper-V
>>
>> So Hyper-V does actually support DOS?
>
> It does. You just need to make sure you tell it you're installing a 
> Generation 1 VM (which includes a BIOS so you can virtualize DOS and older 
> versions of Windows).
>
> I also have Ubuntu installed under Hyper-V in Windows 10 and VMs (currently, 
> DOSEmu2 and KVM) installed in Ubuntu. I did need to do some manipulation in 
> Windows to allow hypervisor capabilities to pass through Hyper-V so that 
> Ubuntu could support VMs inside it (virtualization-inside-virtualization).
>
>>> JPC
>>
>> The Java one??
>
> Yes. I needed to install the Java Runtime Engine in Windows to get this to 
> work.
>
>>> KVM
>>
>> This is just QEMU using VT-X, right?
>
> I'm not sure exactly how it works. I do know that the "official" name now is 
> QEMU/KVM, so they are interlinked at some level. I also know the Red Hat is 
> somehow involved in the mix, but am unsure of the details.
>

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> Jerome's V8Power Tools will detect some VMs, IIRC:

Yes, I checked that out.  In the version I looked at, it detects 3 different 
VMs all using the same method (looking for a specific identification string in 
BIOS memory).  That method works with some VMs, but not all.

> Although I never truly needed to know what VM

Sometimes I do.  I have my machine set up for lots of different kinds of 
testing.  I have several VMs installed and several different manufacturers and 
versions of DOS that can be used in them.  Some VMs just virtualize the 
hardware and the BIOS and let you install whatever DOS (or Windows or ...) you 
want.  Others have a virtual DOS already built into them (sometimes based on 
FreeDOS and sometimes something unique).

One of the main things that started me down this rabbit trail was the need to 
know which Ethernet card is being virtualized in a particular VM so I can load 
the correct packet driver.  I have a single ETHERNET.BAT file I run to install 
the packet driver, and since detecting which network card is installed is a 
tricky proposition I do it indirectly by detecting the VM (or lack of VM if I'm 
running on real hardware).

> the naive ways to detect (from my limited experience) are
> a). check DOS version

Can work in some VMs, but mostly not.

> b). check VESA version string
> c). check BIOS string.

Those are essentially the same method.  If VESA is supported in the VM (some do 
and some don't), the VESA version string is also in BIOS (usually in segment 
C000h or C800h).  The "BIOS string" I think you're referring to is usually 
somewhere in segment F000h.  Again, this only works with some VMs.

> (You could also check the cpu, but that's messy. DOSBox is a "fast
> 486" DX2 by default, IIRC.)

Some VMs (like PCem and 86Box) will virtualize different kinds of CPU's, so 
detecting the CPU is not a good method.  Also, most VMs will simply "pass 
through" the host's CPU and report it as their own instead of accurately 
identifying the virtualized CPU.  Some VMs report the CPU accurately, but most 
don't.

>> DOSBox
>
> "Only for games". (Maxes out at 64 MB RAM, meh. "Slow Pentium" is
> best it can emulate, IIRC.)

No, it can run "real" applications also.  But you're correct that its primary 
focus is compatibility with games.

>> DOSBox-X
>
> It's quite interesting (esp. running atop FreeDOS itself). But I
> haven't tested it too heavily.

Similar in many respects to DOSBox.

> DOSEmu / DOSEmu2
>
> Is this available in any repos? I'm very naive. Didn't the original
> used to be in "multiverse"? I'm not sure it's there anymore.

Not sure about DOSEmu, but I just downloaded and installed DOSEmu2 in the last 
few weeks in Ubuntu 22.04 (and my Ubuntu is running under Hyper-V in Windows 
10).

> I still haven't tried DOSEMU2 yet, but it uses its own modified FDPP
> (DOS) kernel, right?

It does.  I'm not sure exactly what's different between the DOSEmu "FreeDOS" 
and real FreeDOS, though.

> Hyper-V
>
> So Hyper-V does actually support DOS?

It does.  You just need to make sure you tell it you're installing a Generation 
1 VM (which includes a BIOS so you can virtualize DOS and older versions of 
Windows).

I also have Ubuntu installed under Hyper-V in Windows 10 and VMs (currently, 
DOSEmu2 and KVM) installed in Ubuntu.  I did need to do some manipulation in 
Windows to allow hypervisor capabilities to pass through Hyper-V so that Ubuntu 
could support VMs inside it (virtualization-inside-virtualization).

>> JPC
>
> The Java one??

Yes.  I needed to install the Java Runtime Engine in Windows to get this to 
work.

>> KVM
>
> This is just QEMU using VT-X, right?

I'm not sure exactly how it works.  I do know that the "official" name now is 
QEMU/KVM, so they are interlinked at some level.  I also know the Red Hat is 
somehow involved in the mix, but am unsure of the details.

>> Parallels
>
> Mac?

Yes.  I downloaded and installed Mac OSX Catalina under VMWare in Windows 10 
and installed a trial version of Parallels in Catalina.

>> QEMU
>
> I usually just used Stefan Weil's Windows binaries from his site. (I
> don't remember what version I have installed, probably 6.x on Win7.
> Latest version of his seems to be 7.1.0.)

I'm using 7.1.0 under Windows 10.

>   vDOS

> Wengier did some work on VDOSPlus, I thought (for apps, not games,
> with LFNs and better printing support).

Could be.  I mostly got hooked up with vDOS because it's what's recommended on 
Ed Mendelson's WPUniverse site (WordPerfect).

>> VirtualBox

> Even VirtualBox dropped 32-bit hosts and non-VT-X cpus a few years
> ago. (They use OpenWatcom to compile the BIOS.)

I have VMs for both DOS and Windows XP installed under VirtualBox in Windows 
10.  I use the XP virtual machine to test VirtualPC (since VirtualPC doesn't 
work with newer versions of Windows).

>> There are also a few other VMs out there that I'm not sure will run
>> DOS (the documentation is unclear and I haven't been able to
>> install or test 

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Andrew Bird via Freedos-devel]

On Tue, 25 Oct 2022 16:54:12 -0500
Rugxulo  wrote:

> 
> >   DOSEmu / DOSEmu2  
> 
> Is this available in any repos? I'm very naive. Didn't the original
> used to be in "multiverse"? I'm not sure it's there anymore.

Dosemu 1.4 was dropped from Ubuntu just before 20.04 release, presumably that's 
when it was removed from multiverse.

> 
> I still haven't tried DOSEMU2 yet, but it uses its own modified FDPP
> (DOS) kernel, right?

It has its own DOS(FDPP) based on FreeDos, but it's not compulsory. It does CI 
testing on FreeDOS 1.2 / DR-DOS 7.01 / MS-DOS 6.22 and its own FDPP so 
compatibility with those should be ensured.

> It has a PPA or whatever, not sure.

Yep
  PPA is here https://launchpad.net/~dosemu2/+archive/ubuntu/ppa
  RPMs for Fedora are here https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/stsp/dosemu2/
  RPMs for SUSE are here 
https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/stsp2/openSUSE_Tumbleweed/
   
> (This does supposedly support VT-X now.

It does. 

> They used to support other methods, but
> I'm not sure if that's still supported.

CPU emulation is supported and is the primary platform for CI tests, however 
VM86 (32bit hosts only) is rarely tested.

> Also, they might be 64-bit host only, not sure.)

64 bit is the preferred platform, 32 bit should still work but no CI platforms 
are available to test.




___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 9:07 PM Bret Johnson  wrote:
>
> I've been working on some updates to the ISLOADED program I sent to Jim a few 
> weeks ago.
> Lately I have been specifically trying to add the detection of different 
> Virtual Machines (including VirtualBox)
> to ISLOADED.  It turns out that there are a BUNCH of VMs out there that I've 
> gotten to work with DOS:

Jerome's V8Power Tools will detect some VMs, IIRC:

* 
https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/v8power.html

Although I never truly needed to know what VM, the naive ways to
detect (from my limited experience) are a). check DOS version, b).
check VESA version string, c). check BIOS string. (You could also
check the cpu, but that's messy. DOSBox is a "fast 486" DX2 by
default, IIRC.)

Actually, I take that back, several pieces of software check for
"version 7" and behave differently, which sometimes fails. Like I
said, it's naive and imperfect. (Also some like DR-DOS 7.03 report
"IBM DOS 6" for compatibility and need their own incompatible version
check [int 21h, "DR"] just to know for sure.)

>   DOSBox

"Only for games". (Maxes out at 64 MB RAM, meh. "Slow Pentium" is best
it can emulate, IIRC.)

>   DOSBox-X

It's quite interesting (esp. running atop FreeDOS itself). But I
haven't tested it too heavily.

>   DOSEmu / DOSEmu2

Is this available in any repos? I'm very naive. Didn't the original
used to be in "multiverse"? I'm not sure it's there anymore.

I still haven't tried DOSEMU2 yet, but it uses its own modified FDPP
(DOS) kernel, right? It has a PPA or whatever, not sure. (This does
supposedly support VT-X now. They used to support other methods, but
I'm not sure if that's still supported. Also, they might be 64-bit
host only, not sure.)

>   Hyper-V

So Hyper-V does actually support DOS? From what I read (years ago), I
wasn't sure. (Back then it was 64-bit Pro VT-X only.) This is also
what WSL2 supposedly uses behind the scenes.

>   JPC

The Java one??

>   KVM

This is just QEMU using VT-X, right?

>   Parallels

Mac?

>   QEMU

I usually just used Stefan Weil's Windows binaries from his site. (I
don't remember what version I have installed, probably 6.x on Win7.
Latest version of his seems to be 7.1.0.)

>   vDOS

Wengier did some work on VDOSPlus, I thought (for apps, not games,
with LFNs and better printing support).

>   VirtualBox

Even VirtualBox dropped 32-bit hosts and non-VT-X cpus a few years
ago. (They use OpenWatcom to compile the BIOS.)

> There are also a few other VMs out there that I'm not sure will run DOS (the 
> documentation is unclear
> and I haven't been able to install or test them for various reasons):
>
>   BHyve

This was created for FreeBSD and first released in 10.0, IIRC. It
requires a 2010 Intel (or newer) with VT-X (and EPT). IIRC, they
"mostly" wanted to run other versions of BSD, but there was partial
effort to get other OSes (even with a BIOS) running. Honestly, I never
tried it, but it sounded interesting. (Wasn't the Mac port called
xhyve?)

* https://wiki.freebsd.org/bhyve
* https://bhyve.org/

Apparently it can also run x64 Windows via UEFI. (sysutils/grub2-bhyve
is used for running some other *nixes.)

> I know the FreeDOS web site also lists several VMs (some of the same ones 
> I've listed above,
> plus JSLinux which is similar to JPC).

Not sure, JSLinux is Javascript while (IIRC) JPC Is Java. There used
to also be JDOSBox in Java and one guy (I forget) hosts JSDOSBox
(Javascript) with demos on his site.

There's also 8-Bit Workshop's website, but I don't know what that
uses. (There's a lot of fragmentation and old versions).

There were also Joris' Retro (Java) and 8086tiny (in C, with various forks).

> At least some of the VMs have a "built-in" DOS, often based on some version 
> of FreeDOS (for example, VPC and DOSEmu).

VPC uses FreeDOS?? Not sure.

DOSEMU used to allow MS- or DR- or FD-, but I had weakly thought
DOSEMU2 required its own FreeDOS fork called FDPP.

> Anyway, I'm wondering how "involved" FreeDOS should be in the VM world
> (I think in today's world the vast majority of users install DOS under a VM 
> rather than on real hardware,
> though I personally do both).

Yes, I agree that VMs are more common for FreeDOS users nowadays,
especially with no more BIOS or CSM on new machines.

> How involved in testing / recommending applications (including games)
> for compatibility should FreeDOS actually be, particularly when a VM is 
> involved?

I would say games are low priority (but still vaguely important) and
thus harder to get working. My main interest is in getting old utils
and compilers to run. Graphics (and especially sound) are a whole
other ball of wax.

> Where/how should the results be documented (or if there even should be a 
> central repository)?

You mean like DOSBox's compatibility list? Or WINE? Does WINE still
use DOSBox itself?


___
Freedos-devel mailing 

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> RHV is based on oVirt which is based on KVM plus qemu & libvirt &
> lots of other bits. It'll run DOS but you might have jump through
> hoops (learn virsh and other tools) to get it installed.
>
> BHyve, at least as in TrueNAS Core and OSX/Mac OS before M1 will
> also run DOS.
>
> I think it's at least worth documenting DOS on TrueNAS Core, TrueNAS
> Scale, Proxmox, Unraid, Linux+Cockpit (which should look like KVM)
> and maybe Xen/XCP-NG as well as popular x86 emulators for RPi if
> feasible.

Do you actually have any of these installed and working?

I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle this moving forward.  At a 
minimum, we should move it to its own thread -- and maybe it doesn't even 
belong in a FreeDOS thread.  But I'm sure several people in here would be 
interested (I'm pretty sure at least Jim would be VERY interested).

Just FYI, it doesn't seem possible to create a generic "I'm running in a VM of 
some sort" test.  You need to test for each VM individually, and they all do 
different things that may or may not allow you to detect them.  Of course, that 
means you need to know about every possible VM out there both now and in the 
future (and I've never even heard of some of those you mentioned above before 
now).  I've got about six different methods I've found to detect various VMs 
(some through research on the Internet and some though experimentation).  In 
some VMs several of the methods work and in other VMs none of them work (at 
least not reliably).  In can also vary depending on whether you're using and 
old or new version of the VM.

There are also cases where there is "cross-linking" between the VMs, especially 
in Linux.  E.g., once you install KVM (Kernel Virtual Machine) in Linux it 
seems to "infect" the other VMs so it's hard to tell them apart (they seem to 
look like KVM).

If you actually have some of these installed and working, I can "tweak up" a 
version of ISLOADED so you can do some testing for me (that's what I've been 
working on for the last several days in my copious free time).  Are you 
interested?


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[stefano cirilli]

On 25/10/22 12:02, stefano cirilli wrote:
> I have a fully working USB flash drive with the LiveCD image, 
> https://www.ventoy.net/en/index.html about me the best solution to have
> bootable USB on fly.
>
> On 25/10/22 00:48, Jim Hall wrote:
>>> On 23/10/22 20:46, Jim Hall wrote:
 I keep meaning to test Rufus  to see if it will
 successfully create a bootable USB flash drive based on the FreeDOS
 LiveCD. If it does, I don't think we need to keep either the FullUSB
 or LiteUSB.

 Has anyone here used Rufus to create a bootable USB flash drive from
 the LiveCD image?
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 5:18 PM tauro via Freedos-devel
>>  wrote:
 I think users shouldn't depend on software that's exclusively designed
>>> to work on Windows (Rufus).
>>>
>> There are other programs that do the same thing on other platforms. I
>> exclusively run Linux, so I was thinking about Fedora Media Writer on
>> Fedora Linux.
>>
>> But I agree that we should be sure these other tools exist (for Linux, Mac, 
>> etc)
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[stefano cirilli]

I have a fully working USB flash drive with the LiveCD image, 
https://www.ventoy.net/en/index.html about me the best solution to have
bootable USB on fly.

On 25/10/22 00:48, Jim Hall wrote:
>> On 23/10/22 20:46, Jim Hall wrote:
>>> I keep meaning to test Rufus  to see if it will
>>> successfully create a bootable USB flash drive based on the FreeDOS
>>> LiveCD. If it does, I don't think we need to keep either the FullUSB
>>> or LiteUSB.
>>>
>>> Has anyone here used Rufus to create a bootable USB flash drive from
>>> the LiveCD image?
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 5:18 PM tauro via Freedos-devel
>  wrote:
>>> I think users shouldn't depend on software that's exclusively designed
>> to work on Windows (Rufus).
>>
>
> There are other programs that do the same thing on other platforms. I
> exclusively run Linux, so I was thinking about Fedora Media Writer on
> Fedora Linux.
>
> But I agree that we should be sure these other tools exist (for Linux, Mac, 
> etc)
>
>
> ___
> 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] Bonus/Devel CD

[Louis Santillan]

RHV is based on oVirt which is based on KVM plus qemu & libvirt & lots of
other bits. It’ll run DOS but you might have jump through hoops (learn
virsh and other tools) to get it installed.

BHyve, at least as in TrueNAS Core and OSX/Mac OS before M1 will also run
DOS.

I think it’s at least worth documenting DOS on TrueNAS Core, TrueNAS Scale,
Proxmox, Unraid, Linux+Cockpit (which should look like KVM) and maybe
Xen/XCP-NG as well as popular x86 emulators for RPi if feasible.

On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 7:07 PM Bret Johnson  wrote:

> > But if a game is known to *not* work at all on VirtualBox (for
> > example) I recommend we discuss removing it.
>
> This brings up a slightly different topic, so maybe deserves its own
> thread, but I'll bring it up here.
>
> I've been working on some updates to the ISLOADED program I sent to Jim a
> few weeks ago.  Lately I have been specifically trying to add the detection
> of different Virtual Machines (including VirtualBox) to ISLOADED.  It turns
> out that there are a BUNCH of VMs out there that I've gotten to work with
> DOS:
>
>   86Box
>   Bochs
>   DOSBox
>   DOSBox-X
>   DOSEmu / DOSEmu2
>   Hyper-V
>   JPC
>   KVM
>   Parallels
>   PCem
>   QEMU
>   vDOS
>   VirtualBox
>   VirtualPC (Connectix)
>   VirtualPC (Microsoft)
>   VMWare
>
> There are probably others as well, but those are the ones I've managed to
> successfully build test environments for.  They all have their own
> individual quirks and idiosyncrasies and advantages.  A lot of times the
> open-source ones also "borrow" code from each other (for example, JPC
> "borrows" part of its BIOS from Bochs).
>
> There are also a few other VMs out there that I'm not sure will run DOS
> (the documentation is unclear and I haven't been able to install or test
> them for various reasons):
>
>   Project ACRN
>   BHyve
>   QNX
>   Red Hat Virtualization
>   Rosetta
>   Xen VMM
>   XTA
>
> I know the FreeDOS web site also lists several VMs (some of the same ones
> I've listed above, plus JSLinux which is similar to JPC).  At least some of
> the VMs have a "built-in" DOS, often based on some version of FreeDOS (for
> example, VPC and DOSEmu).
>
> Anyway, I'm wondering how "involved" FreeDOS should be in the VM world (I
> think in today's world the vast majority of users install DOS under a VM
> rather than on real hardware, though I personally do both).  How involved
> in testing/recommending applications (including games) for compatibility
> should FreeDOS actually be, particularly when a VM is involved?  Where/how
> should the results be documented (or if there even should be a central
> repository)?
>
>
> ___
> 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] Bonus/Devel CD

[Bret Johnson]

> But if a game is known to *not* work at all on VirtualBox (for
> example) I recommend we discuss removing it.

This brings up a slightly different topic, so maybe deserves its own thread, 
but I'll bring it up here.

I've been working on some updates to the ISLOADED program I sent to Jim a few 
weeks ago.  Lately I have been specifically trying to add the detection of 
different Virtual Machines (including VirtualBox) to ISLOADED.  It turns out 
that there are a BUNCH of VMs out there that I've gotten to work with DOS:

  86Box
  Bochs
  DOSBox
  DOSBox-X
  DOSEmu / DOSEmu2
  Hyper-V
  JPC
  KVM
  Parallels
  PCem
  QEMU
  vDOS
  VirtualBox
  VirtualPC (Connectix)
  VirtualPC (Microsoft)
  VMWare

There are probably others as well, but those are the ones I've managed to 
successfully build test environments for.  They all have their own individual 
quirks and idiosyncrasies and advantages.  A lot of times the open-source ones 
also "borrow" code from each other (for example, JPC "borrows" part of its BIOS 
from Bochs).

There are also a few other VMs out there that I'm not sure will run DOS (the 
documentation is unclear and I haven't been able to install or test them for 
various reasons):

  Project ACRN
  BHyve
  QNX
  Red Hat Virtualization
  Rosetta
  Xen VMM
  XTA

I know the FreeDOS web site also lists several VMs (some of the same ones I've 
listed above, plus JSLinux which is similar to JPC).  At least some of the VMs 
have a "built-in" DOS, often based on some version of FreeDOS (for example, VPC 
and DOSEmu).

Anyway, I'm wondering how "involved" FreeDOS should be in the VM world (I think 
in today's world the vast majority of users install DOS under a VM rather than 
on real hardware, though I personally do both).  How involved in 
testing/recommending applications (including games) for compatibility should 
FreeDOS actually be, particularly when a VM is involved?  Where/how should the 
results be documented (or if there even should be a central repository)? 


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Jim Hall]

> On 23/10/22 20:46, Jim Hall wrote:
> > I keep meaning to test Rufus  to see if it will
> > successfully create a bootable USB flash drive based on the FreeDOS
> > LiveCD. If it does, I don't think we need to keep either the FullUSB
> > or LiteUSB.
> >
> > Has anyone here used Rufus to create a bootable USB flash drive from
> > the LiveCD image?


On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 5:18 PM tauro via Freedos-devel
 wrote:
>> I think users shouldn't depend on software that's exclusively designed
> to work on Windows (Rufus).
>


There are other programs that do the same thing on other platforms. I
exclusively run Linux, so I was thinking about Fedora Media Writer on
Fedora Linux.

But I agree that we should be sure these other tools exist (for Linux, Mac, etc)


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[tauro via Freedos-devel]

On 23/10/22 20:46, Jim Hall wrote:

I keep meaning to test Rufus  to see if it will
successfully create a bootable USB flash drive based on the FreeDOS
LiveCD. If it does, I don't think we need to keep either the FullUSB
or LiteUSB.

Has anyone here used Rufus to create a bootable USB flash drive from
the LiveCD image?
I think users shouldn't depend on software that's exclusively designed 
to work on Windows (Rufus).


I have used the LiteUSB image to create a bootable flashdrive with dd in 
the past and it's been quite useful.


I suggest not to remove it, or at least keep the FullUSB or some USB image.


On 23/10/22 15:44, Jerome Shidel wrote:

Although the next major version of FDIMPLES will most likely support online 
repositories, it is being written %100 in assembly and not coming soon. Even 
once the new version of FDIMPLES is ready, general networking support under 
FreeDOS is very limited. This leaves us with providing additional packages on 
the release media for the near future.
Nice! That will be very useful, as the user won't depend on removable 
media to remove/update/install new software.



Tauro


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[tom ehlert]

when downloading https://github.com/FDOS/kernel via

[code] downnload ZIP

the downloaded kernel-master\country directory is empty, and the
project does not build.

correcting for this, the the boooting kernel goes as far as


FreeDOS boot FAT kernel GO!

compiler watcom C

Tom



___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Jim Hall]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 1:45 PM Jerome Shidel  wrote:
>
> Although there has not been a lot of feed back on what to do with the
> excessively (nearly 1GB) BonusCD in T2210, I think the majority of
> feedback has been in favor of splitting off the development packages
> from the BonusCD on to their own DevelCD.
>
> And, we should do this instead of dropping packages for several
> reasons. The main reason is for the convenience of users who may
> be on older hardware or without network support. Those users might
> experience some difficulty getting all of the programs they need into
> their “DOS” machine.
>
> It has also been suggested to provide a “Developer Oriented” release
> of FreeDOS. One that is specifically geared towards DOS development.
>
> Another suggestion has been to just slim down FreeDOS to basic
> DOS.  Leaving it up to the user to find, download and install what
> they want after the OS has been installed.
>[..]

I like the idea of having "developer" stuff on the BonusCD, and
keeping the "user" stuff on the first CD. That's a logical way to
divide it, and it's easy to explain. We could also put the "editor"
packages on the BonusCD as well.

I am also in favor of removing some old packages from the FreeDOS
distribution. I think we have a lot of packages there that have
minimal value.

I think the graphical desktops are an obvious place to start. OpenGEM
is the most stable, and thanks to Liam for pointing out the paths
problem. But oZone and SEAL are incomplete and broken. When I recorded
the video for oZone  on
our YouTube channel, I had to avoid some broken parts of oZone. I know
SEAL is similarly incomplete. I don't think oZone and SEAL are adding
any value to FreeDOS. I vote we remove them.

Also, the value of any graphical desktop is apps that support it. And
neither SEAL nor oZone have much in the way of apps. OpenGEM has a
stable API where interested developers could write new OpenGEM apps -
although this has never happened as far as I remember, and we've
included OpenGEM in FreeDOS for a long time. But maybe OpenGEM stays
for now.


I'm also in favor of changing out some of the games. We've discussed
here before (I think around the time of FreeDOS 1.1) that DOS games
were not "core" to FreeDOS, so we could change those out freely. I'd
look for fun games that run well on the most popular platforms (on
real hardware, and on VirtualBox). It's okay to require config tweaks
to get a game to work well on VirtualBox or real hardware - such is
the way with all classic DOS games. But if a game is known to *not*
work at all on VirtualBox (for example) I recommend we discuss
removing it.


I think we have other packages in Util that could also be removed
without anyone noticing, but I would like to go through the package
list more closely before I comment on that.


> I’m unsure of the best solution to the problem.
>
> I don’t think providing a Developer Oriented skew of the OS is a good
> idea. With the LegacyCD, LiveCD, LiteUSB, FullUSB and Floppy Edition,
> I think we provide to many OS skews already. Since we want to support
> a wide range of DOS hardware, we really need to keep the Floppy and
> CD version around.
>
> We could probably drop the LiteUSB for several reasons. I think
> it’s direct usage is very limited and most users probably opt for
> the FullUSB version. Also, every “how-to” and video I’ve seen
> online that shows how to create a bootable USB stick for FreeDOS uses
> the LiveCD to create it. However, occasionally, I do see questions on
> how to write one of the USB media to a flash drive.
>
> We could also probably drop the LegacyCD as well. There is only a very
> limited range of early hardware that cannot boot the LiveCD. But,
> it can boot the LegacyCD. That hardware will most likely also have
> a floppy drive. If their CD drive is supported by the drivers, they
> could boot using the “Floppy Boot Image” included in the download
> zip. Once that is done, they can install from CD.

I keep meaning to test Rufus  to see if it will
successfully create a bootable USB flash drive based on the FreeDOS
LiveCD. If it does, I don't think we need to keep either the FullUSB
or LiteUSB.

Has anyone here used Rufus to create a bootable USB flash drive from
the LiveCD image?


> So where does that leave us? I think there are at least two practical
> solutions at present.
>
> First, split off all development related packages that are on the
> BonusCD onto a new DevelCD. This would require very little work. The
> Release Build Environment (RBE) is already capable of creating multiple
> extra package discs images. However, I will probably want to add some
> functionality to use specific labels for them. At present, it would
> generate BonusCD0 and BonusCD1. It will not be hard to update the RBE
> to use custom labels for the discs. This first solution implies we may
> eventually have a GamesCD, UtilsCD and others as well. 

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 1:46 PM Jerome Shidel  wrote:
>
> Although there has not been a lot of feed back on what to do with the 
> excessively (nearly 1GB) BonusCD in T2210, I think the majority of feedback 
> has been in favor of splitting off the development packages from the BonusCD 
> on to their own DevelCD.

Yes, probably.

I don't have it nearby to look, but a glance at this list ...

* 
https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.2/repos/pkg-html/group-devel.html

... shows a lot of DJGPP stuff. Now, I *love* DJGPP and all it does,
but man, is it bloated! That alone takes up the most space, I think.
We definitely *don't* need "full" DJGPP here.

> And, we should do this instead of dropping packages for several reasons. The 
> main reason is for the convenience of users who may be on older hardware or 
> without network support. Those users might experience some difficulty getting 
> all of the programs they need into their “DOS” machine.

Agreed, but you can't please everyone. It's not just DOS support or
even "I want C" but dialects and various other minor features.

> It has also been suggested to provide a “Developer Oriented” release of 
> FreeDOS. One that is specifically geared towards DOS development.

I actually thought about making my own personal "floppy" for
programming! So I know that's not quite what you wanted, but for me,
it would be useful:

* nasm16 + val, mawk, minised, picoc, P5 Pascal (pcom/pint), dx-forth,
regina, dmake, etc.

 Bundled editor would probably be old SteVIe or e3-16 or even e14_edit.

> So where does that leave us? I think there are at least two practical 
> solutions at present.
>
> First, split off all development related packages that are on the BonusCD 
> onto a new DevelCD. This would require very little work. The Release Build 
> Environment (RBE) is already capable of creating multiple extra package discs 
> images. However, I will probably want to add some functionality to use 
> specific labels for them. At present, it would generate BonusCD0 and 
> BonusCD1. It will not be hard to update the RBE to use custom labels for the 
> discs. This first solution implies we may eventually have a GamesCD, UtilsCD 
> and others as well. If we go down this path, perhaps we should start 
> separating some other packages on to their own media as well.

DJGPP could have its own disk. (On my old hard drive, I had at least 1
GB used by DJGPP stuff.) You might also want to include DJGPP-derived
things like Free Pascal and FreeBASIC.

I mean, I've mentioned before that I made a single 1.44 MB floppy of
an old DJGPP (2.03p2 with GCC 2.95.3 + BinUtils 2.16.1 + make 3.79)
compressed by 7-Zip (so you only need the small 7zdec). That's C only
and lacks C99 and newer GCC features and has no extra graphic or
networking libs, but it's much smaller (and can fit on small a RAM
disk). Newer GCC is *much* larger.

> I don’t know if there is a good solution to this issue. But, I am certain we 
> can not provide a "950Mb BonusCD.”
>
> If you have any comments or other suggestions on the problem, please speak up.
>
> :-)

Jerome, you're very smart and have done a ton for FreeDOS, so I trust
whatever decision you make here. Don't stress too much over it.


___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Bonus/Devel CD

[Jerome Shidel]

Although there has not been a lot of feed back on what to do with the 
excessively (nearly 1GB) BonusCD in T2210, I think the majority of feedback has 
been in favor of splitting off the development packages from the BonusCD on to 
their own DevelCD. 

And, we should do this instead of dropping packages for several reasons. The 
main reason is for the convenience of users who may be on older hardware or 
without network support. Those users might experience some difficulty getting 
all of the programs they need into their “DOS” machine. 

It has also been suggested to provide a “Developer Oriented” release of 
FreeDOS. One that is specifically geared towards DOS development. 

Another suggestion has been to just slim down FreeDOS to basic DOS.  Leaving it 
up to the user to find, download and install what they want after the OS has 
been installed.

Personally, I don’t think dropping everything except basic DOS is the way to 
go. I think doing so would be off-putting to most “New” users. Although they 
would have a fully functioning DOS, it really would not do much on it’s own. It 
would require them to go get other software or games and create a usage barrier 
that most would just uninstall the OS an move on to something else.

Most “modern” operating systems either provide numerous bonus software. They do 
this by either providing it on their release media or through an easy method of 
downloading and installing software. There are many examples of this in the 
Linux world. For example, openSUSE does both. It provides thousands of extra 
packages on it’s release DVD and also connects to a download center to provide 
them. 

Although the next major version of FDIMPLES will most likely support online 
repositories, it is being written %100 in assembly and not coming soon. Even 
once the new version of FDIMPLES is ready, general networking support under 
FreeDOS is very limited. This leaves us with providing additional packages on 
the release media for the near future. 

I’m unsure of the best solution to the problem. 

I don’t think providing a Developer Oriented skew of the OS is a good idea. 
With the LegacyCD, LiveCD, LiteUSB, FullUSB and Floppy Edition, I think we 
provide to many OS skews already. Since we want to support a wide range of DOS 
hardware, we really need to keep the Floppy and CD version around.  

We could probably drop the LiteUSB for several reasons. I think it’s direct 
usage is very limited and most users probably opt for the FullUSB version. 
Also, every “how-to” and video I’ve seen online that shows how to create a 
bootable USB stick for FreeDOS uses the LiveCD to create it. However, 
occasionally, I do see questions on how to write one of the USB media to a 
flash drive. 

We could also probably drop the LegacyCD as well. There is only a very limited 
range of early hardware that cannot boot the LiveCD. But, it can boot the 
LegacyCD. That hardware will most likely also have a floppy drive. If their CD 
drive is supported by the drivers, they could boot using the “Floppy Boot 
Image” included in the download zip. Once that is done, they can install from 
CD. 

So where does that leave us? I think there are at least two practical solutions 
at present. 

First, split off all development related packages that are on the BonusCD onto 
a new DevelCD. This would require very little work. The Release Build 
Environment (RBE) is already capable of creating multiple extra package discs 
images. However, I will probably want to add some functionality to use specific 
labels for them. At present, it would generate BonusCD0 and BonusCD1. It will 
not be hard to update the RBE to use custom labels for the discs. This first 
solution implies we may eventually have a GamesCD, UtilsCD and others as well. 
If we go down this path, perhaps we should start separating some other packages 
on to their own media as well. 

The second option is to go big. On this path, we could do away with the 
BonusCD. We could keep the LiveCD as-is. But, we could also provide a LiveDVD. 
I do kind of like the idea of providing as much quality software as we can on a 
single disc. On this path we may not need the USB versions. Most users tend to 
use programs like Rufus to create bootable USB drives from the LiveCD.

I don’t know if there is a good solution to this issue. But, I am certain we 
can not provide a "950Mb BonusCD.”

If you have any comments or other suggestions on the problem, please speak up. 

:-)

Jerome







___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel