Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/2/2015 7:36 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: I doubt that you will even see one (1) 32-bit version of FreeDOS. Whoever is seriously claiming on working on that just doesn't know what they will get themselves into. MS/PC/DR-/FreeDOS is at its very core 16bit/x86. You get yourself

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On Fri, 2 Jan 2015, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > I've detailed the advantages in several other emails, and so far as what > applications would run on it... both traditional DOS apps and new 32-bit > applications as well. Might be trickier if you're talking about 16-bit apps that hit the metal. Even

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

> > I doubt that you will even see one (1) 32-bit version of FreeDOS. Whoever > is seriously claiming on working on that just doesn't know what they will > get themselves into. MS/PC/DR-/FreeDOS is at its very core 16bit/x86. You > get yourself in one development hell if you try to change that. And

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Vote noted! :) On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Ralf Quint wrote: > On 1/1/2015 2:43 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > > Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a > > minimum hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we > > exclude the pre-386 crowd without backlas

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Aitor Santamaría wrote: > Thank you Rugxulo! > +1 :) -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

i have HX extender mirrored http://4ch.mooo.com/fdos/pack/ -- View this message in context: http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21602.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/2/2015 3:29 PM, Michael Brutman wrote: > The great news is that anybody can go off and do whatever they want to > as this is all a hobbyist effort anyway. But lets stop calling it a > discussion about the FreeDOS roadmap. Once it goes to 32 bits its not > FreeDOS anymore. Copy the code an

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/2/2015 2:28 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > It wouldn't be only the speed increase, but the fact that we'd be > modernizing FreeDOS as a whole. > > I think of it this way: What would Microsoft have done had they not > gone exclusively to Windows? I am doubtless they would've migrated > MS-DOS

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/2/2015 12:30 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > Well, I wasn't advocating that we leave behind our "16-bit roots" > altogether, because it is possible to still run 16- as well as 32-bit > code on a 32-bit OS.Then again, if we go to a 32-bit kernel and still > run 16-bit code... exactly what have

Re: [Freedos-devel] Good Reading Materials

On 1/2/2015 9:03 AM, Andy Stamp wrote: > Hello Folks, > > I've been working on creating a program called LPXLATE which converts > ESC/P print data from legacy apps into PCL or PS for printing on > modern printers. > > Most of my time has been spent working on the conversion routines, but > I wou

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

That's why I suggest two kernels, 16 and 32 and make it switchable like through a boot up keywords like F7. -- -Chris Evans Computer Consultant, Systems Administrator, Programmer, PC technician Digitalatoll Solutions Group (Tawhaki Software) Cell. : 916-612-6904 | http://www.tawhakisoft.slyip.ne

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/1/2015 7:15 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: We can add modern OS features (protected memory and multitasking are still quite doable) without jumping to 32-bit code. After all, there obviously already is a 32-bit FreeDOS project, and it wouldn't really make sense to have /two/ 32-bit versions

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

On 1/1/2015 2:43 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a > minimum hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we > exclude the pre-386 crowd without backlash? > Absolutely NOT! Ralf --- This email has been checked for viruses by

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi, That's my guess: 2015-01-02 0:05 GMT+01:00 : > If you take a look one of the links from Jim recently he states: > > "But in an alternate reality, what would DOS had looked like if Microsoft > *hadn't* moved to Windows? I think we get to define what that looks like." > My guess is that if Wi

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

FreeDOS is, by definition, a re-implementation of DOS. If you read the specification on the Wiki the kernel targets MS-DOS 3.3 and the applications target MS-DOS 6.22. There is no need to modernize FreeDOS. Anything 32 bit would be radically different and thus is a different project. IBM and Mic

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Thank you Rugxulo! I always was somewhat concerned about such licensing issues, but the software looks pretty valuable! :) Aitor 2015-01-02 23:24 GMT+01:00 Rugxulo : > Hi, > > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Aitor Santamaría > wrote: > > > > PS: Btw, I continue to be a bit worried about [ ww

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

Hi, This might be longer than necessary, but I figured I may as well dump it all on ya, just to be complete! On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > > Thanks for the links, I appreciate that but I know... pretty much nothing of > Pascal lol My only experience has been with the

Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0

On Wed, 31 Dec 2014, Jim Hall wrote : > let's look at the history of DOS > MSDOS 4 had multitasking, but that was taken out before MSDOS 4.01. Lest I forgot, a happy new year to all ! And, Jim, a correction, as you seem to be confused here. Mutitasking DOS was "European MSDOS 4", a differ

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

It wouldn't be only the speed increase, but the fact that we'd be modernizing FreeDOS as a whole. I think of it this way: What would Microsoft have done had they not gone exclusively to Windows? I am doubtless they would've migrated MS-DOS to a 32-bit platform years ago. If we were to do such a mo

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi, On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Aitor Santamaría wrote: > > PS: Btw, I continue to be a bit worried about [ www.japheth.de ], anyone? http://web.archive.org/web/20140904175113/http://www.japheth.de/HX.html Also, dare I mention, the licensing is a bit ambiguous. Great if all you care about

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

Thanks for the links, I appreciate that but I know... pretty much nothing of Pascal lol I think I just need to clean up my code and things should be fine. Actually, I can't even say "my code". The directory traversal routine (which is the root of the problem) was part of an old public domain progr

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

Hi, On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > > Yeah, the lack of a 16-bit target made me pretty much write it off for this > project. The project is having string space corruption issues right now > anyway, so a C rewrite (or just forgetting the project altogether lol) may > be m

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

I agree -- View this message in context: http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21585.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Dive into the Wor

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

no no! i mean it dose not require a 386 just to run the kernel and the command prompt alone bare minimal setup! -- View this message in context: http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21584.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabb

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Well, I wasn't advocating that we leave behind our "16-bit roots" altogether, because it is possible to still run 16- as well as 32-bit code on a 32-bit OS.Then again, if we go to a 32-bit kernel and still run 16-bit code... exactly what have we gained? Like I said before, I can see both sides of t

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

What's the difference between FreeDOS 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3? Bug fixes, updates to the user space packages, improvements to the installer, and possibly improvements to the packaging. I reject the argument that FreeDOS needs to evolve and leave its 16 bit roots behind, similar to the way MacOS did. Ma

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi, I don't know how "that can run in real mode by default" differs from current situation. Maybe you mean that FreeDOS drops EMM386.EXE. Regards, Aitor 2015-01-02 20:47 GMT+01:00 sparky4 : > I think the FreeDOS 2.0 version should be a updated 16 bit kernel that can > run in real mode by defa

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

i agree with everything -- View this message in context: http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21580.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- D

Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!

I know, right? The IDE is Windows-based but yes, it surprisingly defaulted to QB compatibility rather than FB. Yeah, the lack of a 16-bit target made me pretty much write it off for this project. The project is having string space corruption issues right now anyway, so a C rewrite (or just forgett

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

I think the FreeDOS 2.0 version should be a updated 16 bit kernel that can run in real mode by default and the freedos-32 stuff should merge with OSFree -- View this message in context: http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/FreeDOS-1-2-and-2-0-roadmap-discussion-tp21529p21578.html Sent from the F

Re: [Freedos-devel] Good Reading Materials

Hi, With the idea of creating a TSR (and not a DOS device driver), I would suggest reading other simple TSR's, in order to see how to hook/unhook interrupt vectors. The basics would be to hook and then finish your program with the terminate_and_stay_resident call. mKEYB or FD-KEYB are examples (in

Re: [Freedos-devel] freedos 1.2

Hi Roberto, So far as point number 2, that may be doable since Bret has posted the source for all his USB drivers on his website . I'll have to see if he would allow us to officially package them as part of FreeDOS 1.2. On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 12:49 PM,

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi, I myself agree with the first and third point. About the second, I'm not advocating for a different 32-bit OS (such as FreeDOS-32). I also agree that one first target would be the UEFI stuff. But at long term, I am of the opinion that VxDs are DOS drivers, as much as the classic "DEVICE=" dri

Re: [Freedos-devel] AGUI user interface library released

Thank you for your christmas gift!... that I just opened today! Well, I am kind of looking for a small-easy to learn GUI for years. And as new year began, I was looking back again at Gtk, but I might find yours easier. By example, just not having pkg-config in Mingw was a stopper for me with Gtk.

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion

Hi, Not only about kernels, but about the 16-bit DOS compiling options too. I think we talked about this in the past, and I think it'd make sense that FreeDOS 2.0 would be 386+. Aitor 2015-01-01 23:43 GMT+01:00 Mercury Thirteen : > Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require

Re: [Freedos-devel] freedos 1.2

I agree! -- View this message in context: http://freedos.10956.n7.nabble.com/freedos-1-2-tp21571p21572.html Sent from the FreeDOS - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming

[Freedos-devel] freedos 1.2

Hi all. if is possible, in the new 1.2 distro please considerate this points : 1) the defragmenter utility DON'T defragment fat32 disk.If you try to move sector via menue seem defragment, but if you quit program and re-open you retry your disk fragmented. 2) don't exist in FD distro a equivalen

[Freedos-devel] Good Reading Materials

Hello Folks, I've been working on creating a program called LPXLATE which converts ESC/P print data from legacy apps into PCL or PS for printing on modern printers. Most of my time has been spent working on the conversion routines, but I would like to start working on integrating this code into a

Re: [Freedos-devel] drives.exe

I think that would almost have to be emulator-related. It seems your copy of DOSemu isn't simulating the disks fully enough for Drives to detect them. I'd be interested to learn the extent to which it *does* simulate them, so I could extend my program to work anyway, though. On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 a

Re: [Freedos-devel] drives.exe

Jim, I think I broke the link you posted in the News section of FreeDOS.org. Per your suggestion the archive is now called *drives11.zip*. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored b

Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0

The list of features on the kickstarter seem to be copied/pasted from the FreeDOS-32 page: http://freedos-32.sourceforge.net Jim On Dec 31, 2014 1:03 PM, wrote: > > I'm curious what the specific uses are being proposed for FreeDOS-32 ? > > The kickstarter site mentions supporting DJGPP compiled

Re: [Freedos-devel] Working on FreeDOS 1.2

I haven't tried putting the FreeDOS 1.1 installer on a USB fob drive, but it would probably work if the ISO image was written using liveusb-creator. https://fedorahosted.org/liveusb-creator/ I use this to every time I upgrade Linux on my laptop, because my laptop doesn't have a CDROM drive. It's g

Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0

I didn't see any mention of that, but it would be a great place to start... -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is yo

Re: [Freedos-devel] Working on FreeDOS 1.2

Hi all, I agree with Tom M. I would like to have a better installer, too. If I could use this installer to install FreeDOS 1.2 from USB stick instead of floppy and/or CD that would be really great. :-) Best regards and thank you very much Christian Thomas Mueller schrieb am Do., 1. Jan. 2015 13

Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0

And then why not emphasize the real benefits of DOS since like for ever? Direct access to hardware and real time behaviour (linux is not real time) - Oorspronkelijk bericht - Van: "imre leber" Aan: "Technical discussion and questions for FreeDOS developers." Verzonden: Vrijdag 2 j