subject:"Re\: \[Freedos\-devel\] Volunteering"


Hi Usul,

 I agree, the FreeDOS installer is currently a bit annoying, you must
 click and wait a dozens of time. Would be better first to choose all
 packets or to click just go ahead and install everything...

I would prefer everything which can install in a fast and safe way
as one of the predefined selections ;-). In other words, no drivers
which need download, no network or usb stuff which can hang, no 3rd
party software such as F-Prot. Just stuff from the CD-ROM, so I can
come back 5 minutes later and have a working base system. Network
and other stuff can be done later but at least I have a nice DOS.

 Part that I hated most was that I had to keep clicking.

Clicking per category and the heavy flicker were annoying yes.
Although I must say that most people will be happy with only
the BASE category already, so they can download a small ISO...

They can still download other stuff later, manually or via the
FDUPDATE or other services :-).

 I used to organize all the system files in a system directory. and
 the apps in an app directory under C: instead of under the system
 directory.

You can move around your files after installing, of course :-).
It just makes the installation and package management a lot
easier and faster to unzip everything into c:\fdos... As Blair
already said, if you move around stuff, it could confuse the
installer, fdpkg or fdupdate... On the other hand, you can
always download zips manually and ignore fdpgk and co anyway.

You will miss some comfort but if you are used to moving your
files into custom directories, I am sure you prefer manually
sorting your files according to your taste anyway :-).

 Lastly the installer insisted on trying to setup networking even when
 I have no network card in this laptop. Lots of errors and extra enter
 keys. I have seen code out there that does hardware detection in dos.

Yeah... Our installer does use PCI bus scanning, too, but the
DHCP autoconfiguration still has some risk to fail... Or the
drivers might crash, etc. In short: I recommend NOT to use any
network during INITIAL install. Avoid anything that can hang
or crash. Please DOS users with a quick basic installation :-).

 Saying that the installer worked and everything got onto my system.
 So I am not bad mouthing the work that was done.  :)

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering


Hi Michael,

 I thought nothing usable besides the io.sys,
 sort.exe and sys.com sources from DOS 3.3 had turned up...

 No, even MS-DOS 6.0.
 Also source for xcopy and so on.
 I said *usable*, as in compilable.
 
 I haven't tested to compile as I am to lazy to setup a build
 environment, the older the software the harder it seams to get the build
 environment. No idea if it needs some dependencies or so.
 
 However, it looks pretty complete, even emm386, dosshell etc. included.

Why on earth would you want to compile 17 year old stolen
source code if you can just steal the pre-compiled Windows
of your flatmate today? ;-) Or for example download MS DOS
from a warez page etc etc. Not my taste, of course... ;-).

  (Naturally, though, this knowledge  would taint someone from
 doing equivalent code for FreeDOS, which is one  reason I
 don't get into the kernel even if I understood how the heck
 that stuff worked in the *first* place.)

Thanks for the warning :-)). Luckily most of the FreeDOS
kernel is written in C... One of the things that make it
complicated is that it sometimes has to follow long chains
of things calling each other because it is documented that
MS DOS does it the same way, so for example drivers only
work if FreeDOS does the same complicated stuff...

 Besides even io.sys would be great becuase it's the bible
 as it's the whole kernel.
 No... that's MSDOS.SYS, which exists only as OBJ files.

It sounds strange that the MSDOS.SYS sources would not be
leaked while the EMM386 sources would be out there ;-).

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

Eric Auer schrieb:
 Hi Michael,
 
 I thought nothing usable besides the io.sys,
 sort.exe and sys.com sources from DOS 3.3 had turned up...
 
 No, even MS-DOS 6.0.
 Also source for xcopy and so on.
 I said *usable*, as in compilable.
 I haven't tested to compile as I am to lazy to setup a build
 environment, the older the software the harder it seams to get the build
 environment. No idea if it needs some dependencies or so.

 However, it looks pretty complete, even emm386, dosshell etc. included.
 
 Why on earth would you want to compile 17 year old stolen
 source code if you can just steal the pre-compiled Windows
 of your flatmate today? ;-) Or for example download MS DOS
 from a warez page etc etc. Not my taste, of course... ;-).

Well, compiling makes indeed no point until the copyright cleared.

But you can use ms-dos source code as a reference to get freedos finally
compatible with ms-dos as it's one of the goals.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne

By the way I also think Arachne is one of the DOS flagship projects.

Unfortunately there are some very basic things which makes this software
less useful and afaik there is currently no one continuing the
development of this project.

1) no SSL support
- latest DOSLynx implemented it

2) Linux port
- From Arachne v1.93 there is also a Linux port.
- Unfortunately it's also not completely synchronized with v1.95.
- I wonder why there are two different source packages, the DOS and
Linux source should be unified as any multi platform application which
can be compiled in a few steps for different platforms does this so. It
also ensures also that all ports are always up to date.

3) uses still real mode and xswap
- Udo Kuhnt made an alpha version with DPMI out of v1.90J1 while latest
version in the maintree is v1.95 but I think backporting the few
changes shouldn't be a big deal
- I am not sure whenever Udo Kuhnt's version uses 16 or 32 bit DPMI but
it I think it's 16.
- 32 bit DPMI would be better.
- As I think xswap will not work in native Linux (no emulation) as there
is no xms, ems so it must have been ported already. Why the DOS version
uses still xswap then?

4) compiler
- still dependent to Borland C, port to OW and/or DJGPP would be good
because more people are using it
- Makes it point to port it from C to C++?

5) to many ports
- There are to many ports with different features floating around, all
should be merged, there was even a windows port form 1.6x or so.

6) graphics backend
- Dr WebSpyder and Lineo Embrowser (unfortunately no source code) ported
to Allegro and gave Arachne a speed boost.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering


Hi Michael,

 Why on earth would you want to compile 17 year old stolen
 source code if you can just steal the pre-compiled Windows
 of your flatmate today? ;-) Or for example download MS DOS
 from a warez page etc etc. Not my taste, of course... ;-).

 Well, compiling makes indeed no point until the copyright cleared.

I doubt that MS will ever give you an official okay. Imagine
somebody stole your EC card and waits for a few years for a
message from you that it is okay to use it for his goals ;-)

On the other hand, MS does not spend much time for hunting
and removing downloads of illegal copies of DOS floppies now
so if you do not care about law anyway, you can easily find
and install MS DOS without having to mess with compilers.

 But you can use ms-dos source code as a reference to get freedos
 finally compatible with ms-dos as it's one of the goals.

A goal reached by illegal means is not really reached in my
opinion. If the priority of MS DOS compatibility is higher
than the priority of law, stealing MS DOS install disks is
a much easier way to reach the goal than stealing sources
and putting them or things learned from them into FreeDOS.

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne


Hi Michael,

 By the way I also think Arachne is one of the DOS flagship projects.

I agree.

 1) no SSL support
 - latest DOSLynx implemented it

I believe there are also eLinks based projects with SSL for DOS?

 2) Linux port
 - From Arachne v1.93 there is also a Linux port.
 - Unfortunately it's also not completely synchronized with v1.95.
 - I wonder why there are two different source packages, the DOS and
 Linux source should be unified as any multi platform application..

Arachne is not as cool as the big browsers among those who CAN
run the big browsers - But it could be, in particular because
it has the potential to run with little RAM... At the moment,
alas, it still needs big RAM or big temp directory for the
rendering of JPEG and other images as far as I remember...?

Another good thing to have would be basic Javascript, and I think
there were projects in that direction...

 3) uses still real mode and xswap
 - Udo Kuhnt made an alpha version with DPMI out of v1.90J1 while latest
 version in the maintree is v1.95 but I think backporting the few
 changes shouldn't be a big deal

Not sure...

 - As I think xswap will not work in native Linux

You will not need any of that if you simply compile Arachne
with a 32bit compiler in the first place. I do not think any
286 or older PC could run Arachne at acceptable speed anyway.

 4) compiler
 - still dependent to Borland C, port to OW and/or DJGPP would be good

I agree.

 - Makes it point to port it from C to C++?

No. Only if there is much of hard-to-read object-related code
and only if you have the idea that this code would be easier
to implement in object oriented languages.

 6) graphics backend
 - Dr WebSpyder and Lineo Embrowser (unfortunately no source code)
 ported to Allegro and gave Arachne a speed boost.

Arachne has GPL license so you can force WebSpyder/Lineo to
make their Arachne modifications public.

I agree that Arachne (and MPXPLAY) are nice DOS projects which
can become even nicer if there are more volunteers to help them.

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne

2009-03-29 Thread lyricalnanoha



On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Eric Auer wrote:


 Hi Michael,


snips here and there

 1) no SSL support
 - latest DOSLynx implemented it

 I believe there are also eLinks based projects with SSL for DOS?

Dunno if the elinks port does SSL, I haven't tried that aspect.

 4) compiler
 - still dependent to Borland C, port to OW and/or DJGPP would be good

 I agree.

DJGPP's libs are very Borland-like to begin with.  Nice feature.

 - Makes it point to port it from C to C++?

 No. Only if there is much of hard-to-read object-related code
 and only if you have the idea that this code would be easier
 to implement in object oriented languages.

Agreed: there's almost never a need to translate anything from C to C++.

-uso.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

Eric Auer schrieb:
Hi Michael,

Why on earth would you want to compile 17 year old stolen
source code if you can just steal the pre-compiled Windows
of your flatmate today? ;-) Or for example download MS DOS
from a warez page etc etc. Not my taste, of course... ;-).

Well, compiling makes indeed no point until the copyright cleared.

I doubt that MS will ever give you an official okay. Imagine
somebody stole your EC card and waits for a few years for a
message from you that it is okay to use it for his goals ;-)

I am sure that in 100 till 1 billion years (if humans sill exist then)
the copyright will be finally gone. Or will we have a newsline then
FreeDOS developer stolen ms-dos source code and now in prison?

On the other hand, MS does not spend much time for hunting
and removing downloads of illegal copies of DOS floppies now
so if you do not care about law anyway, you can easily find
and install MS DOS without having to mess with compilers.

Here are very bad news for you. You are violating the law so often in
your life. There is so many law text concerning you and you can never
memorize everything and while you are just living you can not have all
the laws still in back mind, that's impossible.

And if you try to follow the law of more then the country in which you
life then it will become even more impossible.

For an doctor everyone is a sick person, he just needs to look clone
enough on it and for an lawyer also every person is guiltily, he also
just needs to look clone enough on it.

But you can use ms-dos source code as a reference to get freedos
finally compatible with ms-dos as it's one of the goals.

A goal reached by illegal means is not really reached in my
opinion.

It's still questionable if it's illegal.

How can we finally prove that it's illegal or not?

Well, two questions to you.
1) Which kind of punishment to you expect for downloading the ms-dos
source code?
2) What kind of punishment wouldn't still hurt you?

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Hacker-Paragraf-Verfahren-gegen-iX-Chefredakteur-eingestellt--/meldung/134306
After reading this article I had an funny idea.

If the priority of MS DOS compatibility is higher
than the priority of law, stealing MS DOS install disks is
a much easier way to reach the goal than stealing sources
and putting them or things learned from them into FreeDOS.

You pretend as in FreeDOS is no knowledge which has been robbed from
MS-DOS.

(rob = stealing with violence or menace,
theft = the original object is lost and in hands of the thief only)

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne

Eric Auer schrieb:
 - As I think xswap will not work in native Linux
 
 You will not need any of that if you simply compile Arachne
 with a 32bit compiler in the first place.

Why it can't be also simple compiled on DOS with 32 bit compiler?

 6) graphics backend
 - Dr WebSpyder and Lineo Embrowser (unfortunately no source code)
 ported to Allegro and gave Arachne a speed boost.
 
 Arachne has GPL license so you can force WebSpyder/Lineo to
 make their Arachne modifications public.

No, them have purchased a proprietary license from the copyright holders
(original developers). GPL doesn't surrender rights. It's dual licensing
like with Qt.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-29 Thread lyricalnanoha



On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:

 It's still questionable if it's illegal.

...only in one way: one could take the code, describe it in gory detail, 
then have someone else write new code from the description without having 
seen the code, that would be (I think) legal, and it's been done many 
times before. (Most famously with the PC BIOS)

-uso.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

Hi Michael,

FreeDOS developer stolen ms-dos source code and now in prison?

That not, but for example China DOS seems to be a
rip of Win98 DOS so they often have to change their
homepage and I never saw them in a commercial product.

While FreeDOS is used for things like mainboard CDs,
industrial printers, public transport ticket vending
and similar close to hardware / small PC stuff...

Here are very bad news for you. You are violating
the law so often in your life.

Yeah but why should I steal software when there are
more than 1 free programs available for Linux
and other open source systems, including FreeDOS?
Sure, maybe there are only 1000 GNU apps ported to
DOS yet (look at the DJGPP homepage) but this is
still a lot of software for 0 Euro, even legal :-).

It's still questionable if it's illegal.
How can we finally prove that it's illegal or not?

By reading any law book you can probably find out
that company secrets are not open for free use ;-)
Even if it was somebody else who leaked them first.

1) Which kind of punishment to you expect for
downloading the ms-dos source code?

It would become unacceptable for others to let me
spread stolen information by adding things based
on that information to free software projects. It
is obvious that I would immediately delete such
files because I prefer the open source world and
not the criminal world to sit on my computer.

2) What kind of punishment wouldn't still hurt you?

I do not understand the question... And you do not
seem to understand open source, if I may say that.

www.heise.de/newsticker/Hacker-Paragraf-Verfahren-gegen-iX-Chefredakteur-eingestellt--/meldung/134306

Pretty unrelated news - Somebody protested against
making software to check for security holes illegal
by blaming himself of being a criminal because he
is a security expert. There is a difference between
using software to check for security holes as part
of your job and with permission of those checked and
stealing software with permission only of yourself.

You pretend as in FreeDOS is no knowledge which has
been robbed from MS-DOS.

(rob = stealing with violence or menace,
theft = the original object is lost and in hands of the thief only)

Nice that you enjoy laughing about possible legal
loopholes but I would have preferred you to work
for open source instead of explaining us why it
is better to steal than to work... ;-). Alas it
is a bit too late now - how can we know whether
the help you offer is not just copy and paste?

Eric

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne


Hi,

 - As I think xswap will not work in native Linux
 You will not need any of that if you simply compile Arachne
 with a 32bit compiler in the first place.
 
 Why it can't be also simple compiled on DOS with 32 bit compiler?

That is what I meant - port Arachne to GNU C / DJGPP and
then you have better performance in DOS - and an easier
life in porting to Linux. Two good things for one effort.

 - Dr WebSpyder and Lineo Embrowser (unfortunately no source code)
 ported to Allegro and gave Arachne a speed boost.
 Arachne has GPL license so you can force WebSpyder/Lineo to
 make their Arachne modifications public.
 
 No, them have purchased a proprietary license from the copyright holders
 (original developers). GPL doesn't surrender rights. It's dual licensing
 like with Qt.

Oh I understand. That is bad luck for fans then, fans
will have to port Arachne to Allegro a second time if
they want a free open source Allegro based Arachne...

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - some webpages


Hi Usul / Adam,

 I am very interested in helping. If you have any tasks that
 you need done, even if it is unglamorous. I'll take it. :)

We have a page about this:

 www.freedos.org/jhall/2009/01/29/you-can-help.html

- package updated packages for FDUPDATE and FDPKG and installer
  Work in progress:

 www.viste-family.net/mateusz/fdupdate/wip/

- proof-read the new version of English or German htmlhelp
  I am not sure whether this is the most up to date copy but:

 www.bootablecd.de/FreeDOS/help/index.htm

- check the bug lists and the faq, for example to check whether
  current versions of our software still have the bug and then
  report your results:

 http://fd-doc.sourceforge.net/faq/cgi-bin/index.cgi
 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=5109atid=105109
 www.freedos.org/bugzilla/cgi-bin/report.cgi

- you can also help the FDISK maintainer to improve disk and
  LBA detection etc, many people seem to have problems there

 www.freedos.org/freedos/software/ - base - fdisk

 I have been programing for 15 years.

Good, that can help a lot in matching bug reports to
source code and finding out what and how is broken :-)

 I can code C  C++ but not Assembly, ... yet.

FreeDOS includes much software written in C or mostly in C.

 Willing to learn/do whatever. I am very interested.

Thanks a lot :-)

 Need someone interested and willing to mentor the dos
 programming stuff I don't know.

You can ask on the list, via mail, in our IRC... :-)

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

Eric Auer schrieb:
 It's still questionable if it's illegal.
 How can we finally prove that it's illegal or not?
 
 By reading any law book you can probably find out
 that company secrets are not open for free use ;-)
 Even if it was somebody else who leaked them first.

On law book there are loads of different opinions. The only binding
verdict gives the court and so far no court has judged about that.

 Nice that you enjoy laughing about possible legal
 loopholes but I would have preferred you to work
 for open source instead of explaining us why it
 is better to steal than to work... ;-).

Again, theft = original is lost and in hands of thief only.

The problem with downloading is that things are virtual and the original
is still in hands of the original producer. So stealing is probable not
the right word.

Also again, why do you believe FreeDOS is free of MS-DOS's intellectual
property? That's impossible as you implemented a pretty compatible
operating system.

What do you think where the Undocumented DOS knowledge has come from?

 Alas it
 is a bit too late now - how can we know whether
 the help you offer is not just copy and paste?

This makes me think... *Imagine* *someone* would claim there is MS-DOS'
s source code copy  pasted into FreeDOS's source code.

What could you do? You would need to stop using FreeDOS as it *probable*
contains illegal stuff. On the other hand you have *no way* to confirm
whenever it's the truth or not.

Everyone trying to find out whenever it is the truth or not will violate
itself the law. Isn't this absurd?

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-29 Thread lyricalnanoha

You're starting to sound more and more like a troll with each post you 
write:

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:

 Also again, why do you believe FreeDOS is free of MS-DOS's intellectual
 property? That's impossible as you implemented a pretty compatible
 operating system.

Remember how I said I keep my hands out of the kernel source? If I have 
any knowledge of the MS code for something, I stay away from working on 
any clones as a coder, because I am tainted - that's not just my policy, 
but as I recall, that's the official FreeDOS policy.

 What do you think where the Undocumented DOS knowledge has come from?

Do you know what a Chinese wall is?  I mentioned how the Phoenix BIOS 
came into being - information gleaned from Undocumented DOS is the same 
exact process.

 This makes me think... *Imagine* *someone* would claim there is MS-DOS'
 s source code copy  pasted into FreeDOS's source code.

 What could you do? You would need to stop using FreeDOS as it *probable*
 contains illegal stuff. On the other hand you have *no way* to confirm
 whenever it's the truth or not.

Just ask ReactOS: they actually had accusations of NT code in their system 
and analyzed the entire source tree to make sure it was clean.

-uso.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering


Hi Michael,

 Again, theft = original is lost and in hands of thief only.

Yeah I agree that stealing copies is something different
from stealing the original but if stealing copies was
legal then nobody could sell anything that can be copied
which would be a very strange situation if you ask me.

 Also again, why do you believe FreeDOS is free of MS-DOS's
 intellectual property? That's impossible as you implemented
 a pretty compatible operating system.

The basic interfaces are published and well-documented.
This is the case even for Windows if you look at the
Microsoft homepage... Other sources of information are
RBIL and the Undocumented DOS book which both involve
Ralf Brown and many contributors and which both are
very old. If Microsoft had any problem with them, why
did they not ask Addison-Wesley to pull the book from
the market during the last 16 years? Contributors to
RBIL even include people from Microsoft who were asked
by email to clarify some undocumented details. There
was also lots of trial and error involved to find out
what interfaces and data structures mean, I guess.

 Imagine someone would claim there is MS-DOS's source
 code copy  pasted into FreeDOS's source code.
...
 What could you do? You would need to stop using FreeDOS
 as it probable contains illegal stuff.
...
 On the other hand you have no way to confirm whenever
 it's the truth or not. Everyone trying to find out
 whenever it is the truth or not will violate
 itself the law. Isn't this absurd?

If it would not be obvious trolling, I would say that
MS can ask a neutral third party to compare the freely
accessible source code of FreeDOS to a copy of the MS
DOS source code which MS would give to that 3rd party
under a non disclosure agreement to check that claim.

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne

2009-03-29 Thread Geraldo Netto

Hi all,

wouldn't be better porting dillo for freedos?
imho, the main bottleneck is the gui part that should be re written


http://www.dillo.org/

See Ya,

Geraldo
Sapere Aude
Non ducor, duco
São Paulo, Brasil, -3gmt
site: http://exdev.sf.net/
msn: geraldo_boca_at_hotmail.com
skype: geraldo-netto
icq: 145-061-456



2009/3/29 Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de:

 Hi,

 - As I think xswap will not work in native Linux
 You will not need any of that if you simply compile Arachne
 with a 32bit compiler in the first place.

 Why it can't be also simple compiled on DOS with 32 bit compiler?

 That is what I meant - port Arachne to GNU C / DJGPP and
 then you have better performance in DOS - and an easier
 life in porting to Linux. Two good things for one effort.

 - Dr WebSpyder and Lineo Embrowser (unfortunately no source code)
 ported to Allegro and gave Arachne a speed boost.
 Arachne has GPL license so you can force WebSpyder/Lineo to
 make their Arachne modifications public.

 No, them have purchased a proprietary license from the copyright holders
 (original developers). GPL doesn't surrender rights. It's dual licensing
 like with Qt.

 Oh I understand. That is bad luck for fans then, fans
 will have to port Arachne to Allegro a second time if
 they want a free open source Allegro based Arachne...

 Eric



 --
 ___
 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] Volunteering - Arachne

2009-03-29 Thread Bernhard Eriksson





Michael wrote:

  
Arachne has GPL license so you can force WebSpyder/Lineo to
make their Arachne modifications public.

  
  
No, them have purchased a proprietary license from the copyright holders
(original developers). GPL doesn't surrender rights. It's dual licensing
like with Qt.
  

Additionally Arachne wasn't GPLed when Michael Polak sold the code to
Caldera (who released DR-Webspyder) or Suntech. Orignally if you wanted
to get a hold of the source code you would need to sign a NDA and sent
it to Michael. I did so after I told Michael I had copied his code (I
still have an account at arachne.cz BTW), which influenced him to later
release it as GPL.
-- 
Bernhard Eriksson, Wermlandsdata
Fryxellsgatan 2, 652 22 Karlstad
054 - 15 69 00, http://www.wermlandsdata.se/
Datorer, tillbehr, service, programmering mm. 




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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-29 Thread Christian Masloch

Hi guys,

EA:
  Thanks for the warning :-)). Luckily most of the FreeDOS
  kernel is written in C... One of the things that make it
  complicated is that it sometimes has to follow long chains
  of things calling each other because it is documented that
  MS DOS does it the same way, so for example drivers only
  work if FreeDOS does the same complicated stuff...

I don't think DOS does anythink too complicated. All layers have a special  
purpose (f.e. CDS for drive redirection, SFT for redirection and device  
handles, etc.) and it isn't that hard to understand all these.

  A goal reached by illegal means is not really reached in my
  opinion. If the priority of MS DOS compatibility is higher
  than the priority of law, stealing MS DOS install disks is
  a much easier way to reach the goal than stealing sources
  and putting them or things learned from them into FreeDOS.

If your priority is not to break the law, buy MS-DOS (and/or Win4.x)  
install disks plus license and use (or DEBUG) these legally ;-)

MR:
 Here are very bad news for you. You are violating the law so often in
 your life. There is so many law text concerning you and you can never
 memorize everything and while you are just living you can not have all
 the laws still in back mind, that's impossible.

Still no excuse to break the law when you _know_ you're doing it.

 How can we finally prove that it's illegal or not?

By asking whether we would want someone to steal (that is, copy) our  
source code and use it violating the license it was released with. If you  
use leaked Microsoft code then that's as if Microsoft would use  
open-sourced FreeDOS code without providing the source of it or links or  
whatever. (Just as DR-DOS, Inc did for their crappy DR-DOS version 8.00;  
and no one accepted it back then.) Please don't say that Microsoft would  
never do that: I don't care.

 The problem with downloading is that things are virtual and the original
 is still in hands of the original producer. So stealing is probable not
 the right word.

What's the right word, then? I doubt it's pirating.

 Also again, why do you believe FreeDOS is free of MS-DOS's intellectual
 property? That's impossible as you implemented a pretty compatible
 operating system.

 What do you think where the Undocumented DOS knowledge has come from?

 From reverse engineering, of course. Some information (f.e. about Novell  
Netware and Novell [DR-]DOS 7.0/6.0, but also from Microsoft) came from  
employees of the associated companies but because they gave these without  
NDA limitations it's allowed to use them, too. Did you read UDOS, anyway?

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne

2009-03-29 Thread Christian Masloch

 - I am not sure whenever Udo Kuhnt's version uses 16 or 32 bit DPMI but
 it I think it's 16.

The difference isn't that big, anyway. Default code operation size  
changes, but this doesn't require changes to the actual code (even in .ASM  
source files) if the assembler or compiler supports both 16- and 32-bit  
output. The code segment can be larger than 64 KiB, which might be the  
main advantage.

 - 32 bit DPMI would be better.

Not necessarily. Some applications even run dual-mode (RM or 16-bit PM) so  
even 16-bit has it's advantages. The 64 KiB code segment limit is the only  
real disadvantage. (Or are code segments with 16-bit default operation  
size not actually limited to 64 KiB?)

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering


Hi, at the risk of making this thread long...

 If your priority is not to break the law, buy MS-DOS (and/or Win4.x)  
 install disks plus license and use (or DEBUG) these legally ;-)

You know that open source has advantages, for example FreeDOS
runs on more modern hardware and is actively supported. If you
try to buy MS DOS instead, they will just tell you that you
have bad taste and should buy Vista ;-). In addition, I have
no compatibility problems with FreeDOS that would motivate
me to use another DOS instead.

 If you use leaked Microsoft code then that's as if Microsoft would use  
 open-sourced FreeDOS code without providing the source of it or links or  
 whatever. (Just as DR-DOS, Inc did for their crappy DR-DOS version 8.00;  
 and no one accepted it back then...)

Interestingly, the Free Software Foundation even has a legal
department to put pressure on people who try to sell closed
source modifications of open source software... So while you
cannot steal free software by using it, ABusing it for your
own profit in ways violating the license is still illegal.

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering


Hi Christian,

 Well, decent MS-DOS kernels plus command interpreters
 also have LBA, FAT32 and DOSLFN support.

That is Windows 98 DOS... Better kernel but fewer apps...
And if you buy it, you get a Windows that you do not
need if you only wanted DOS as unwanted extra... ;-).

 Is it? I'm still waiting for one of us both to apply the
 latest patches regarding SFTs, file seeks and self-
 owning PSP termination to the DOS-C  SVN.

And I still wait for some more life in the thread where
I tried to discuss several other pending patches. It would
be nicer to have some community activity again here...
What do you think about my new wiki page about 2037 code?

 In addition, I have no compatibility problems with
 FreeDOS that would motivate me to use another DOS instead.
 
 I don't use MS-DOS to actually use it, but to debug it and therefore  
 increase the compatibility of FreeDOS, or EDR-DOS, or RxDOS.

I get your point but still... I stopped using MS DOS about
seven years ago when FreeDOS became useful enough for me.
This certainly included some fandom because back then it
was still a bit minimalistic compared to MS DOS / Win98 DOS.
Tastes differ :-).

Eric



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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - gui, libraries, drivers

2009-03-29 Thread Blair Campbell

 Blair has been working on alternative C libraries, for
 example for almost-drop-in-LFN (long file name) support
 or for making compiled apps smaller by compiling with a
 smaller C library. I have the impression that this could
 use some careful proofreading to improve stability...

Yeah I spent a long time writing that :-).  All public-domain, ~90%
from scratch, mostly working.  Some parts of the library are buggy,
but I think if there's enough interest I could release the portion
that deals with lfn support as it seems to be quite stable.  On that
note, some functions seem less buggy on dosemu for some reason than
NTVDM.  Also functions like printf and scanf are much smaller than
their OpenWatcom equivalents.  Other than the bugs though, it's a very
complete C library and includes many POSIX functions and utitlities
that OpenWatcom does not by default provide.  (I even implemented
aio.h just for an experiment :-) )

 Fdisk, Undelete, Defrag and a Scandisk-based-on-dosfsck
 which Blair might be working on at the moment...

Yeah maybe I'll start tomorrow.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering - Arachne

2009-03-29 Thread Blair Campbell

 - 32 bit DPMI would be better.

 Not necessarily. Some applications even run dual-mode (RM or 16-bit PM) so
 even 16-bit has it's advantages. The 64 KiB code segment limit is the only
 real disadvantage. (Or are code segments with 16-bit default operation
 size not actually limited to 64 KiB?)

I agree that 32-bit DPMI is better because 32-bit is more common and
people with 286s are highly unlikely to be browsing the internet with
a graphical browser (if at all).  And in 16-bit code code segments
IIRC don't have to be limited to 64kb; for example if you were using a
compiler that supported huge pointers, it would generate function
calls to increment a pointer if you try to access anything  64kb in
one memory block, but that could considerable slow down an application
and of course the generated code size would be much bigger.  An
application utilizing huge pointers could potentially access 1 MB of
memory IIRC.

 Regards,
 Christian

 --
 ___
 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] Volunteering

2009-03-29 Thread Blair Campbell

 What could you do? You would need to stop using FreeDOS as it *probable*
 contains illegal stuff. On the other hand you have *no way* to confirm
 whenever it's the truth or not.

Was MS-DOS even written in C?  if not, at least the parts written in C
(most) could never have been copied and pasted.

 Everyone trying to find out whenever it is the truth or not will violate
 itself the law. Isn't this absurd?

 -mr

 --
 ___
 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] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread Blair Campbell

 I used to organize all the system files in a system directory. and
 the apps in an app directory under C: instead of under the system
 directory.
 C:\FDOS all the command programs here
 C:\Apps all the applications under here grouped in directories like
 games, develop, utility etc.

If you move things from c:\fdos, you won't be able to use fdpkg to
manage your packages anymore; it is arranged somewhat more closely to
a unix directory tree than a ms-dos one (e.g. bin, doc, appinfo, help
directories as opposed to throwing all DOS-related files in c:\dos
like msdos did).  fdpkg installs all applications in  %DOSDIR%.  If it
didn't, it would need to do work to find one package in one directory,
another package in another directory, etc...

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread Japheth

Hi Adam,

 As Eric put it, NASM is considered more free than JWASM.

as you probably can see there are also rather questionable sentences to find 
in this mailing-list. Freedom, Democracy, Justice, Fairness, ... are 
commonly regarded as positive terms and because of this they are also favorite 
words to hide other, probably not-so-positive intentions. As it is common 
sense to be very cautious when a second-hand car dealer starts to talk about 
fair prices, it is also a good idea not to believe everything what is posted 
here.


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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread Ladislav Lacina

Hi !
If you are more interrested in low level stuff you can work with Eric Auer on 
the FreeDOS kernel. There is few bugs to fix and few feature to add - mainly 
implement the COUNTRY.SYS (functions about national support). You don't have to 
write it from scratch as it is already present in unstable non continuing 
branch of kernel. 

Other tasks are various drivers like Eltorito CD-ROM or ASPI drivers.

If you are more interrested in hi level stuff you can write a GUI for some 
command line tools. For example I am missing some nice CD burning program for 
DOS. We have two command line program - CDRTOOLS, and one other which I can't 
remember now, but it is very annoying to write all the parameters on command 
line. So write a shell for CDRTOOLS :-)

Or you can join to Arachne development team and help improve a DOS internet 
browser Arachne. In recent time few people left the devel team so you are very 
welcome. Look at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/arachnedevelopment/

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread Michael Reichenbach

usul schrieb:
 You could put toghether FreeDOS 1.1...
 most programs have new versions that are ok, but what is mostly needed
 is put all of it toghether, test new versions, fix a few things and
 
 This sounds like a good task for me to start. And I am most certainly willing.
 Would this be pulling together the compiled executables or will I have
 to compiled?

No compiling needed, only packaging, see
http://www.viste-family.net/mateusz/fdupdate/ and mail Mateusz Viste
directly if he doesn't see this thread if you are willing to help him
with the packaging.

To get the packaging is an important step before FreeDOS 1.1.

 Test environment:
 Virtual environment like QEMU or similar?

That's only a personal preference. Qemu, Bochs, VirtualBox, VMware,
VirtualPC, DOSEmu, DOSBox...

A (or more then one) virtualizer is a good source for initial developing
and testing, often an emulator is even more picky about how you
implement. DOSBox is good for DOS games but many utilities refuse to work.

From time to time you can test your things on bare metal. I prefer using
a (USB/eSATA portable) raw harddisk as I can boot this inside an
emulator and on different bare metal at the same time.

Don't rely to much an virtualizers disk access, make backups of your
work often.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

 A (or more then one) virtualizer is a good source for initial developing
 and testing, often an emulator is even more picky about how you
 implement. DOSBox is good for DOS games but many utilities refuse to  
 work.

You can boot a real DOS (f.e. FreeDOS) disk image inside DOSBox which  
makes it usable for development, too.

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread lyricalnanoha



On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Christian Masloch wrote:

 A (or more then one) virtualizer is a good source for initial developing
 and testing, often an emulator is even more picky about how you
 implement. DOSBox is good for DOS games but many utilities refuse to
 work.

 You can boot a real DOS (f.e. FreeDOS) disk image inside DOSBox which
 makes it usable for development, too.

 Regards,
 Christian

Nice for DOSPLUS which can't seem to read the floppy in qemu (and similar 
problems plague other pre-DR DOS DR DOSes.  Yes, I frequently use the 
BOOT command in dosbox.

-uso.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

 As Eric put it, NASM is considered more free than JWASM.

 as you probably can see there are also rather questionable sentences  
 to find
 in this mailing-list. Freedom, Democracy, Justice, Fairness, ...  
 are
 commonly regarded as positive terms and because of this they are also  
 favorite
 words to hide other, probably not-so-positive intentions.

So, do you want to accuse me of the not-so-positive intention to say  
that JWASM has indeed disadvantages? Of course _I_ think that NASM is  
better. However I also listed other available, free assemblers (which are  
non-existant according to the FreeDOS Spec, aren't they?) and used the  
word considered in the comparison. Because it depends on how you  
consider freedom.

 As it is common
 sense to be very cautious when a second-hand car dealer starts to talk  
 about
 fair prices, it is also a good idea not to believe everything what is  
 posted
 here.

I don't understand how this relates to assemblers. Of course he's free to  
use JWASM instead. You could have posted all the great advantages of JWASM  
over NASM (that you surely know some) instead of this. Like that it's more  
the original of x86 Assembly than NASM. Who needs a great manual as  
NASM's, and therefore the possibility to easily learn preprocessor- and  
assembler-specific syntax? (Yes, there might be great MASM manuals or  
books which can be used to write JWASM Assembly. But are they free, only  
like in free of charge?) Or a large community with more than one  
developer, like NASM has? Who cares about that anyway, use the great JWASM  
instead!

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

 If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL
 (Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and  
 Udo's
 Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS
 7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.)

 ...and the sources for MS-DOS also.

An open source version of MS-DOS? I highly doubt that. I disregard using  
the RxDOS 7.1.5 source not because it's commercial or whatever (it's not,  
7.1.5 is GPL) but because it contains many bugs and even without those it  
won't be as compatible to MS-DOS as the recent versions of all other DOS  
kernels.

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread Michael Reichenbach

Christian Masloch schrieb:
 If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL
 (Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and  
 Udo's
 Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS
 7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.)
 ...and the sources for MS-DOS also.
 
 An open source version of MS-DOS?

Not open source, leaked.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread usul

Japheth,

Politics of any sort are this way. It is always extremes that shout
the loudest. In my opinion is aways in the middle the answer always is
in the middle, the middle rarely if ever has an advocate. :P

I like open source and free software. More the spirit of the law
though then the law itself. I feel code should be shared so things
become standard. So much effort is repeated from developer to
developer. If the license  provides for that it is good enough for me.
The minor differences are merely semantics to me.

As for which Assembly Compiler I will use, I probably end up using
which ever is the official one, its easier to follow in the beginning
than trying to rock the boat.

Besides at this point I am more interested in programming and being
part of the project than arguing with people.

As for decompiled source, I don't mind reading books. If the book was
published and the code writer didn't file a lawsuit then its like they
gave their permission.

But I wont decompile or look at code someone else stole.
The person that fences stolen property is as guilty as thief.

That being said I rarely have looked at code I didn't think I could
write better (even my own LOL).  We can do it better. Passion vs
paycheck. :)

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread usul

I am not ready to write driver code, yet.

My main an interest is in designing writing a gui/desktop,
and in writing libraries that can be shared and used by command line
application as well as gui.

But I also have an interest device and similar programming.
I think FreeDos relies alot on closed software borrowed from the
abandoned and unsupported world.

~theMouse

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread usul

fdpkg requires c:\FDOS?
how do you maintain a working existing environment
along side the beta one even following the existing
structure and using c:\FDOSBETA or something acceptable.

perhaps fdpkg could be modified to use a database to store where the
packages are came from etc.

Is there a open source database that can be used in an dos
application, if none exist a flat file could be used as well.

just a thought. the best thing would be to get 1.1 out the door.

I am sure there is documentation for fdpgk I'll read it and figure out
what needs to be done.

~theMouse

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread Gregory Pietsch

It's okay if you know vaguely about the internals of something, but when 
you write an imitation of it, chuck all that code aside and try to write 
yours along different lines. For example, if the original was written to 
conserve memory usage, go for speed instead, or go for generality. The 
code will look much different. If the original was in tightly-written 
assembler, rewrite it in C.

As for compiling, I do not release binaries, so you can download the 
source to FreeDOS Edlin (latest version: 2.11) and try to compile that 
using whatever compiler you wish. You might have to tweak the config.h 
file; just read the comments there.

Another thing you could do is download all the sources and see in your 
opinion what looks great, what looks like garbage, what could be 
reusable. The great stuff, leave alone; the garbage, write a better 
version; the reusable stuff goes into libraries. ;-)

Gregory Pietsch

usul wrote:
 Japheth,

 Politics of any sort are this way. It is always extremes that shout
 the loudest. In my opinion is aways in the middle the answer always is
 in the middle, the middle rarely if ever has an advocate. :P

 I like open source and free software. More the spirit of the law
 though then the law itself. I feel code should be shared so things
 become standard. So much effort is repeated from developer to
 developer. If the license  provides for that it is good enough for me.
 The minor differences are merely semantics to me.

 As for which Assembly Compiler I will use, I probably end up using
 which ever is the official one, its easier to follow in the beginning
 than trying to rock the boat.

 Besides at this point I am more interested in programming and being
 part of the project than arguing with people.

 As for decompiled source, I don't mind reading books. If the book was
 published and the code writer didn't file a lawsuit then its like they
 gave their permission.

 But I wont decompile or look at code someone else stole.
 The person that fences stolen property is as guilty as thief.

 That being said I rarely have looked at code I didn't think I could
 write better (even my own LOL).  We can do it better. Passion vs
 paycheck. :)

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


 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
 Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.31/2028 - Release Date: 03/28/09 
 07:16:00

   


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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread lyricalnanoha



On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, usul wrote:

 perhaps fdpkg could be modified to use a database to store where the
 packages are came from etc.

 Is there a open source database that can be used in an dos
 application, if none exist a flat file could be used as well.

I randomly wonder if it's possible to hack apt-get and the dpkg system 
into working on DOS...

*HIDES*

-uso.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

 fdpkg requires c:\FDOS?
 how do you maintain a working existing environment
 along side the beta one even following the existing
 structure and using c:\FDOSBETA or something acceptable.

No, it doesn't require this directory name. The directory name is read  
 from the DOSDIR environment variable. It only requires the structure of  
subdirectories found in the %DOSDIR% directory (bin, doc, source, ...).

BTW, why is FDPKG only in the directory of the FreeDOS 1.0 release on  
ibiblio.org? I couldn't find it anywhere else.

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-28 Thread Japheth


 So, do you want to accuse me of the not-so-positive intention to say  
 that JWASM has indeed disadvantages?

No, this was generally spoken. I don't know your intentions.

 Of course _I_ think that NASM is better.

Yes, I know. And I think that the more free-advantage of Nasm, which you and 
Eric did point out is nonsense. That's virtually all my post was about.

 I don't understand how this relates to assemblers.

It was a metaphor.

 Of course he's free to use JWASM instead. You could have posted all the great
  advantages of JWASM over NASM (that you surely know some) instead of this.

Probably. But it's not my intention to advertise JWasm.

 (Yes, there might be great MASM manuals or  
 books which can be used to write JWASM Assembly. But are they free, only  
 like in free of charge?) 

I don't know. I'm a strong believer in determinism, that is: freedom exists as 
an idea only, or, if you prefer: as an illusion in your mind.

 Or a large community with more than one developer, like NASM has?

The question whether Masm or Nasm has a larger community or is more widely 
used is indeed somewhat interesting, but it's interesting because it's a 
common propaganda item which nicely shows that people tend to believe what 
they want to believe.

 Who cares about that anyway, use the great JWASM instead!

I realize that you're a bit annoyed, but why? My reply was initiated because I 
felt that someone must take the burden and defend the other side. Isn't that 
just fair :)). Please remember, JWasm is an innocent assembler, it cannot 
defend itself.





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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

 The question whether Masm or Nasm has a larger community or is more  
 widely
 used is indeed somewhat interesting, but it's interesting because it's a
 common propaganda item which nicely shows that people tend to believe  
 what
 they want to believe.

It's also interesting because JWASM and MASM together are possibly still  
more widely used than NASM. That's the reason I explicitly added that  
they have less developers now.

 I realize that you're a bit annoyed, but why? My reply was initiated  
 because I
 felt that someone must take the burden and defend the other side. Isn't  
 that
 just fair :)). Please remember, JWasm is an innocent assembler, it  
 cannot
 defend itself.

Lawl. This absolutely made my day! Just keep on defending it.

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

Hi,

I am not a part of the dev team but a pretty active user and I have
dozens of ideas to implement in C(++) for DOS...

To awake your continued interest on what you might work in the future it
might help to let you do things you are personally interested in.

It would help if you tell us what is your interest in DOS and/or what
you are using it most for. (recovery, backup, hardware testing,
benchmark, web browsing, gaming, music player, server or whatever)

regards,
-mr

usul schrieb:
 Dev Team,
 
 I am very nearly completed on the setup of freedos. all I need now is the
 network card, its in the mail. :)
 But I can copy floppy by floppy if I have to :)
 
 I am very interested in helping. If you have any tasks that you need done,
 even if it is unglamorous.
 I'll take it. :)
 
 Not sure how one applies for this or what you need from me.
 
 I have been programing for 15 years.
 I have done a great deal of windows programming but not dos, ... yet
 I can code C  C++ but not Assembly, ... yet.
 
 Willing to learn/do whatever. I am very interested.
 
 Need someone interested and willing to mentor the dos programming stuff I
 don't know.
 I know that adds a little work and your time but the pay off will be worth
 your time, promise.
 
 Adam Norton
 aka theMouse
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 
 
 
 
 ___
 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] Volunteering


 Hi,


  It would help if you tell us what is your interest in DOS and/or what
  you are using it most for. (recovery, backup, hardware testing,
  benchmark, web browsing, gaming, music player, server or whatever)

My main interest is programming and a challenge. Occasionally play some old
games
that I miss. Bards Tale etc.

http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Subversion%20client%20instructions

I think a port would be a good start given my skill set. I am good at
debugging etc,
and for me looking at existing code is a faster way to start than writing
from scratch.
Debugging an existing app that has issues is ok too.

I considering porting a svn command line tool

Some other projects I have thought about are
GUI/Desktop.
Interested in the Kernel and Assembly programming.

Basically anything that is new and different, in windows at work I feel like
I have been programming the same thing for years.
Different companies, but write a database build the data access and
manipulation, throw some buttons and textboxs
on a form, write a report. Rinse and repeat for a new client.
I want to create that button that I put on the form that I created not
borrowed from a the dot net library.  etc.
I want to know exactly what happens when I do xcopy. reading the hard drive
etc.

Plus I see alot of download this program from here to do that. take the
networking for example.

See I am way ahead of myself. I have lots of experience programing and
working on teams. What I don't have is
dos programming or assembly. I have no clue about what I don't know, am not
even sure what to ask where to look.

So I am quite content to sit back, take the druggy tasks and do whatever I
am told. I'll get to the kewl stuff when I learn
what I am doing.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-27 Thread Alain M.

Hi theMouse,

if you are willing to help, I have one suggestion that will make you 
very knowledgeable of FreeDOS:

You could put toghether FreeDOS 1.1...

most programs have new versions that are ok, but what is mostly needed 
is put all of it toghether, test new versions, fix a few things and 
probably modify a little the installer.

Then you you really wnat to get into it, you could help with the kernel. 
There are some open problems that need attention.

There are a lot of highly skilled programes in this list, if you start 
working on something, I am sure they will step in :)

Alain

usul escreveu:
 Dev Team,
  
 I am very nearly completed on the setup of freedos. all I need now is 
 the network card, its in the mail. :)
 But I can copy floppy by floppy if I have to :)
  
 I am very interested in helping. If you have any tasks that you need 
 done, even if it is unglamorous.
 I'll take it. :)
  
 Not sure how one applies for this or what you need from me.
  
 I have been programing for 15 years.
 I have done a great deal of windows programming but not dos, ... yet
 I can code C  C++ but not Assembly, ... yet.
  
 Willing to learn/do whatever. I am very interested.
  
 Need someone interested and willing to mentor the dos programming stuff 
 I don't know.
 I know that adds a little work and your time but the pay off will be 
 worth your time, promise.
  
 Adam Norton
 aka theMouse
  
 
 
 
 
 --
 
 
 
 
 ___
 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] Volunteering

2009-03-27 Thread Christian Masloch

Hi Adam,

 My main interest is programming and a challenge. Occasionally play some  
 old
 games
 that I miss. Bards Tale etc.

Check out Commander Keen ;-)

 Interested in the Kernel and Assembly programming.

If you want to learn something about the DOS kernel and Assembly language  
I could probably tell you a lot (I'm trying to get the old Assembly  
sources of the RxDOS kernel working). You might as well ask Udo Kuhnt  
(from drdosprojects.de, developing another open-source DOS kernel), or the  
DOS-C kernel guys from here (Eric and Tom wrote recently to the mailing  
list).

 See I am way ahead of myself. I have lots of experience programing and
 working on teams. What I don't have is
 dos programming or assembly. I have no clue about what I don't know, am  
 not
 even sure what to ask where to look.

 So I am quite content to sit back, take the druggy tasks and do whatever  
 I
 am told. I'll get to the kewl stuff when I learn
 what I am doing.

If learning Assembly, first decide whether to use Microsoft's MASM (or  
compatible, free JWASM), or the free NASM (syntax differs slightly), or  
something else like the free FASM. I know that some versions of NASM's  
manual (f.e. the older .CHM one) contain a list with descriptions of all  
Assembly instructions, which helped me to learn the language itself. As  
Eric put it, NASM is considered more free than JWASM. FASM is also more  
free but not used by many people yet.

If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL  
(Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and Udo's  
Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS  
7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.) If you have enough money you may want  
to buy some of the interesting books, especially the second edition of  
Undocumented DOS (mainly deals with reverse-engineering MS-DOS and using  
this undocumented information, very interesting), FreeDOS kernel  
(deals with the source of an early DOS-C  FreeCOM version) and  
Dissecting DOS (deals with source of early RxDOS version). Be aware that  
the RBIL and both of the kernel books contain some errors. If something is  
in doubt, check whether MS-DOS works as predicted by the other source. (Of  
course only use paid copies of MS-DOS for this. If you don't have one, a  
recent PC of you running Windows NT (2000, XP, Vista) might contain the  
NTVDM which is similar to MS-DOS. Windows XP is able to create MS-DOS  
bootdisks, too.)

I've discovered a great source of knowledge on how things actually work is  
available by using DEBUG (of course the new FreeDOS DEBUG which has more  
features than the old Microsoft program) to test all kind of stuff in  
Assembly. The source of useful programs like SHSUCDX (MSCDEX replacement)  
and DOSLFN is also interesting (possibly only if you already know the  
basics of DOS programming).

If you've learned all this stuff and found it interesting, there'll be  
plenty of work for you. If not, you might help the DOS-C guys to write  
their FreeDOS kernel in C. Or port Linux software to the DJGPP  
environment. Or do something entirely else :-)

Regards,
Christian

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

Alain M. schrieb:
 most programs have new versions that are ok, but what is mostly needed 
 is put all of it toghether, test new versions, fix a few things and 
 probably modify a little the installer.

I agree, the FreeDOS installer is currently a bit annoying, you must
click and wait a dozens of time. Would be better first to choose all
packets or to click just go ahead and install everything without bugging
around.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

You can look at drdos.org, see
http://www.unet.univie.ac.at/~a0503736/php/drdoswiki/index.php?n=Main.Development
for a nice overview about DOS development in general with many links.

There are some pretty cool gui toolskits for DOS.
http://www.unet.univie.ac.at/~a0503736/php/drdoswiki/index.php?n=Main.DevelLibs
If you prefer text mode you could use D-Flat+ or Turbo Vision.

Otherwise if you prefer graphical guy... Perhaps you know wxWidgets,
it's also available for DOS. It currently doesn't compile with newest
gcc (djgpp) and also not with ow which is a shame, also the wxwidgets
version is outdated but this is the less annoying thing. Maybe you want
to port it, I think it's a good base for further DOS gui apps and not to
hard for the start.

regards,
-mr

usul schrieb:
 Hi,
 
 
 It would help if you tell us what is your interest in DOS and/or what
 you are using it most for. (recovery, backup, hardware testing,
 benchmark, web browsing, gaming, music player, server or whatever)
 My main interest is programming and a challenge. Occasionally play some old
 games
 that I miss. Bards Tale etc.
 
 http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Subversion%20client%20instructions
 
 I think a port would be a good start given my skill set. I am good at
 debugging etc,
 and for me looking at existing code is a faster way to start than writing
 from scratch.
 Debugging an existing app that has issues is ok too.
 
 I considering porting a svn command line tool
 
 Some other projects I have thought about are
 GUI/Desktop.
 Interested in the Kernel and Assembly programming.
 
 Basically anything that is new and different, in windows at work I feel like
 I have been programming the same thing for years.
 Different companies, but write a database build the data access and
 manipulation, throw some buttons and textboxs
 on a form, write a report. Rinse and repeat for a new client.
 I want to create that button that I put on the form that I created not
 borrowed from a the dot net library.  etc.
 I want to know exactly what happens when I do xcopy. reading the hard drive
 etc.
 
 Plus I see alot of download this program from here to do that. take the
 networking for example.
 
 See I am way ahead of myself. I have lots of experience programing and
 working on teams. What I don't have is
 dos programming or assembly. I have no clue about what I don't know, am not
 even sure what to ask where to look.
 
 So I am quite content to sit back, take the druggy tasks and do whatever I
 am told. I'll get to the kewl stuff when I learn
 what I am doing.
 
 :)
 Adam
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 
 
 
 
 ___
 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] Volunteering

Christian Masloch schrieb:
 If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL  
 (Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and Udo's  
 Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS  
 7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.)

...and the sources for MS-DOS also.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-27 Thread lyricalnanoha



On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:

 Christian Masloch schrieb:
 If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL
 (Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and Udo's
 Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS
 7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.)

 ...and the sources for MS-DOS also.

 -mr

I thought nothing usable besides the io.sys, sort.exe and sys.com sources 
from DOS 3.3 had turned up...

-uso.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

lyricalnanoha schrieb:
 
 On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:
 
 Christian Masloch schrieb:
 If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL
 (Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and Udo's
 Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS
 7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.)
 ...and the sources for MS-DOS also.

 -mr
 
 I thought nothing usable besides the io.sys, sort.exe and sys.com sources 
 from DOS 3.3 had turned up...
 
 -uso.
 

No, even MS-DOS 6.0.
Also source for xcopy and so on.

Besides even io.sys would be great becuase it's the bible as it's the
whole kernel.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

2009-03-27 Thread lyricalnanoha



On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:

 lyricalnanoha schrieb:

 On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:

 Christian Masloch schrieb:
 If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL
 (Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and Udo's
 Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS
 7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.)
 ...and the sources for MS-DOS also.

 -mr

 I thought nothing usable besides the io.sys, sort.exe and sys.com sources
 from DOS 3.3 had turned up...

 -uso.


 No, even MS-DOS 6.0.
 Also source for xcopy and so on.

I said *usable*, as in compilable.  (Naturally, though, this knowledge 
would taint someone from doing equivalent code for FreeDOS, which is one 
reason I don't get into the kernel even if I understood how the heck that 
stuff worked in the *first* place.)

 Besides even io.sys would be great becuase it's the bible as it's the
 whole kernel.

No... that's MSDOS.SYS, which exists only as OBJ files.

-uso.

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

lyricalnanoha schrieb:
 
 On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:
 
 lyricalnanoha schrieb:
 On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Michael Reichenbach wrote:

 Christian Masloch schrieb:
 If you want to learn about (16-bit) DOS kernel stuff, first get the RBIL
 (Ralf Brown's Interrupt List) and the source of DOS-C (mostly C) and Udo's
 Enhanced DR-DOS kernel (Assembly). (You might as well get the old RxDOS
 7.1.5 Assembly sources but oh well.)
 ...and the sources for MS-DOS also.

 -mr
 I thought nothing usable besides the io.sys, sort.exe and sys.com sources
 from DOS 3.3 had turned up...

 -uso.

 No, even MS-DOS 6.0.
 Also source for xcopy and so on.
 
 I said *usable*, as in compilable.

I haven't tested to compile as I am to lazy to setup a build
environment, the older the software the harder it seams to get the build
environment. No idea if it needs some dependencies or so.

However, it looks pretty complete, even emm386, dosshell etc. included.

  (Naturally, though, this knowledge 
 would taint someone from doing equivalent code for FreeDOS, which is one 
 reason I don't get into the kernel even if I understood how the heck that 
 stuff worked in the *first* place.)
 
 Besides even io.sys would be great becuase it's the bible as it's the
 whole kernel.
 
 No... that's MSDOS.SYS, which exists only as OBJ files.

Uhm, as I am only using MS-DOS 7.1 due to FAT32 I've forgotten that
msdos.sys is only a text file in 7.1 but was a code file in 6.22.

-mr

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

Thanks everyone.

Very helpful!
I have ordered Some books :)

FreeDOS Kernel; An MS-DOS Emulator for Platform Independence and
Embedded Systems Development

Undocumented DOS: A Programmer's Guide to Reserved MS-DOS Functions
and Data Structures/Book and Disk (Andrew Schulman Programming)

Dissecting DOS: A Code-Level Look at the DOS Operating System

So I have some reading to do. :)

I think that for me reading first then digging into the freedos source code.

Adam
~theMouse

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering

 I agree, the FreeDOS installer is currently a bit annoying, you must
 click and wait a dozens of time. Would be better first to choose all
 packets or to click just go ahead and install everything without bugging
 around.

 -mr

Part that I hated most was that I had to keep clicking.

Yes I would have liked to select all (tree view) then walk away.

Not being able to choose where the applications went was something
else I didn't like either.
I used to organize all the system files in a system directory. and
the apps in an app directory under C: instead of under the system
directory.
C:\FDOS all the command programs here
C:\Apps all the applications under here grouped in directories like
games, develop, utility etc.

Lastly the installer insisted on trying to setup networking even when
I have no network card in this laptop. Lots of errors and extra enter
keys. I have seen code out there that does hardware detection in dos.

Saying that the installer worked and everything got onto my system. So
I am not bad mouthing the work that was done.  :)

~theMouse

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

Re: [Freedos-devel] Volunteering