[Freedos-devel] FreeDOS Road Map is updated

I have updated the FreeDOS Road Map in the wiki: www.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/FreeDOS_Road_Map This edit reflects the recent discussion on freedos-devel concerning FreeDOS "1.2" & "2.0," and Chelson's Kickstarter project concerning FreeDO

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

Sounds like you've been busy, Jeremy! Please keep it up -- believe me, I can relate to the lack of time to implement and test all of the ideas. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sp

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

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Bertho Grandpied wrote: > Regarding the next FreeDOS 1.2 and possible later 1.x releases, > I'd like to see the kernel upgraded to supporting large sector > sizes, rather than hear fantasies about '32 bit FreeDOS' ! > > As far as the 16-bitty-FreeDOS kernel is conc

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

Couldn't agree more, Czerno. I would also add that the various disk utilities (FORMAT, FDISK, defragging, caching, etc.) should also work correctly with sector sizes other than 512 bytes (even though most of the MS-DOS utilities don't -- SMARTDRV being the major exception that I'm aware of). I

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

Regarding the next FreeDOS 1.2 and possible later 1.x releases, I'd like to see the kernel upgraded to supporting large sector sizes, rather than hear fantasies about '32 bit FreeDOS' ! As far as the 16-bitty-FreeDOS kernel is concerned, it's been clearly stated that the goal is to be (at least)

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

You have my email address. Say them in private if you like. In the past few days you have drawn false analogies to other operating systems, demonstrated a lack of understanding of the origins of FreeDOS or what it is, and made wild statements about what a non-existent piece of software could do.

Re: [Freedos-devel] The new freedos

There is a FreeDOS-32 project, but they have yet to make a release. Including a 32-bit option for users of FreeDOS has been discussed, but there are currently no plans to do so. If this were ever to happen, I agree with you on using two separate modes of operation. On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 8:28 AM,

Re: [Freedos-devel] freedos 1.2

I haven't checked on how he licensed them on the web site, but just because the source code is publicly posted doesn't mean it's "Public domain". That term has a specific legal meaning. So checking with the author is a good idea unless he specifically says that it's ok for anyone to use for any p

Re: [Freedos-devel] freedos 1.2

I've emailed Bret to seek his permission to include his drivers in FreeDOS 1.2 and am still awaiting a reply. Granted, the source is public anyway, but it would be nice to make him aware of our intentions. On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: > Hi Roberto, > > > So far as poin

Re: [Freedos-devel] drives.exe

Updated version 1.2! Drives now checks floppy drives to see if they're empty and no longer prints the launch banner to make it integrate into the OS much more smoothly. There's more I want to do with this program, but I'm about to enter a busy str

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

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:06 PM, Michael Brutman wrote: > You are really providing links to me about how protected mode works? I am > somewhat amused. > > Your new OS has to be able to arbitrate between conflicts caused by the > multiple running VDMs. If two programs running at the same time cho

[Freedos-devel] The new freedos

Hello!I may be confused,but from what I'm reading in the technical emails,FreeDOS is going to be 32-bit.If this is the case,I may have an idea.Make two different "types" of FreeDOS.Their should be..wellFreeDOS,which will keep updating,but REMAINS 16-bit.The purpose of FreeDOS was to emulate the