[Freedos-user] DOSHEXED - memory bug
Hi everyone, I'm trying to edit different files with DOSHEXED from FreeDOS 1.3RC5 CD and it's just disappointing. This editor will complain it's out of memory if we're trying to open a file that won't entirely fit into the leftover conventional memory (<1MiB). I tried editing LOTUS.DAT (approx 1.4MB, from Lotus 3: The Ultimate Challenge) and Stargunner's SETUP.EXE. Luckily the second one fits, given you don't load too many drivers in DOS. Is there any other hex editor for FreeDOS, which works a lot better? Best regards, Michał ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOSHEXED - memory bug
Hi, > On Jan 12, 2022, at 8:58 AM, Michał Dec wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I'm trying to edit different files with DOSHEXED from FreeDOS 1.3RC5 CD and > it's just disappointing. This editor will complain it's out of memory if > we're trying to open a file that won't entirely fit into the leftover > conventional memory (<1MiB). I tried editing LOTUS.DAT (approx 1.4MB, from > Lotus 3: The Ultimate Challenge) and Stargunner's SETUP.EXE. Luckily the > second one fits, given you don't load too many drivers in DOS. Is there any > other hex editor for FreeDOS, which works a lot better? > > Best regards, > > Michał Don’t know about feature comparison. But, UHEX works well enough for most of the stuff I need from a hex editor. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOSHEXED - memory bug
On 12/01/2022 14:58, Michał Dec wrote: Is there any other hex editor for FreeDOS You might want to try uHex. Requires some 20 KiB of RAM and handles files up to 2 GiB. IIRC it is shipped with FreeDOS, but if not then you will find it here: http://uhex.sourceforge.net/ Mateusz ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Video complains that DOS should not be mantained
Good to know, it used to be unstable. Well, I shall be quite darned. A post on the Lynx forum (strange place for it) says Arachne and DosLynx have returned from the dead. Somebody should keep a list somewhere of currently maintained DOS browsers. http://macall.net/info.htm http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/forum_entry.php?id=18569 In the unlikely case that somebody stumbles upon this threat looking for advice, my two cents follow: If you only try one, try Links. That said, although it's harder to set up (infernal options that don't save unless you edit config), Lynx (the original, I haven't tried DosLynx yet) is rock solid and you can also surf the nearly forgotten gopher tunnels that live just under the surface of the www. They both do TLS just fine. On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 5:22 PM Louis Santillan wrote: > Yes. In DOS, in Linux, in Mac`links -g` works great for me. > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 8:17 PM Dan Schmidt wrote: > >> Have you tried links -g ? >> >> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 10:11 PM Louis Santillan >> wrote: >> >>> I haven’t had many crashes in Links2 in normal browsing. I have been >>> able to make it crash calling out to external programs or by shelling out >>> and trying to return to the browser. >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 7:17 AM Dan Schmidt >>> wrote: >>> Links and Lynx both do TLS currently on DOS. Links will even do images, but it's prone to crash in gui mode. On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 2:09 AM Louis Santillan wrote: > Doesn't Links2 do TLS? > > On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 3:45 PM Jim Hall wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 6:28 PM Jose Senna wrote: >> > >> > Liam Proven said: >> > > There were DOS email and chat and FTP >> > > clients; that stuff's fairly easy. >> > >> > Were is the right word. Most email >> > servers nowadays require TLS, which >> > is not available in DOS email clients. >> > There are few remaining FTP servers, >> > and I cannot tell how many also need >> > TLS. >> >> >> That's why I made sure you can access the FreeDOS website from >> http://www.freedos.org/ and https://www.freedos.org >> >> If you're using a DOS web browser, I don't think any DOS web browser >> can manage today's SSL, so you need http instead of https. >> >> But the links from freedos.org to other websites mostly use https, I >> think. Because not everyone wants to set up both http and https for a >> website. >> >> >> Jim >> >> >> ___ >> Freedos-user mailing list >> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user >> > ___ > Freedos-user mailing list > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user > ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user >>> ___ >>> Freedos-user mailing list >>> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user >>> >> ___ >> Freedos-user mailing list >> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user >> > ___ > Freedos-user mailing list > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user > ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOSHEXED - memory bug
> On 12/01/2022 14:58, Michał Dec wrote: >> Is there any other hex editor for FreeDOS > You might want to try uHex. Requires some 20 KiB of RAM and handles > files up to 2 GiB. use int 21, 6C EXTENDED OPEN/CREATE and you can handle 4GiB. > IIRC it is shipped with FreeDOS, but if not then you will find it here: > http://uhex.sourceforge.net/ > Mateusz Tom ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOSHEXED - memory bug
On 12/01/2022 18:22, tom ehlert wrote: You might want to try uHex. Requires some 20 KiB of RAM and handles files up to 2 GiB. use int 21, 6C EXTENDED OPEN/CREATE and you can handle 4GiB. Sure, but that's not very portable code. And it is not enough anyway. To handle 4 GB one would also need to: - replace all 'long' position tracking variables by unsigned long - handle errors in a different way (than passing -1) - use a non-portable construct to replace fseek() - and probably more that I don't think about right away Mateusz ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOSHEXED - memory bug
Hi, On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 7:59 AM Michał Dec wrote: > > Is there any other hex editor for FreeDOS, which works a lot better? Try this: * https://www.sac.sk/download/utilprog/hiew650.zip This is the well-known "freeware" Hacker's View (HIEW) hex editor. IIRC, its built-in disassembler can handle up through Pentium III. There are others like BIEW/BEYE and QVIEW, both with sources, that try to mimic the same interface and features. * https://sourceforge.net/projects/beye/files/biew/6.1.0/ * https://sourceforge.net/p/beye/bugs/38/ * https://www.sac.sk/download/utilprog/biew562.arj * https://www.sac.sk/download/utilprog/qv291src.zip I still use HIEW a lot, it's pretty rock solid. I have used the others occasionally, but I can't say they're quite bug-free. Your mileage may vary. (If you want automated hex editing for batch files, I have other tools in MetaDOS. I also added recompiling BIEW as one of my tests.) Just FYI. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
