On Sat, 13 Jan 2018, Jim Hall wrote:
On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote:
When you've stripped that much out of DOS, you have *nothing*...
Heck, someone was talking about porting FreeDOS to a *6502*, which has access
to up to 64K of memory and I'd STILL see porting FreeDOS
On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote:
>
> When you've stripped that much out of DOS, you have *nothing*...
>
> Heck, someone was talking about porting FreeDOS to a *6502*, which has access
> to up to 64K of memory and I'd STILL see porting FreeDOS as pie in the sky.
>
> 68000, we
When you've stripped that much out of DOS, you have *nothing*...
Heck, someone was talking about porting FreeDOS to a *6502*, which has
access to up to 64K of memory and I'd STILL see porting FreeDOS as pie in
the sky.
68000, well you got GEMDOS, and in fact I think FreeDOS' kernel had 68K
r
Ercan!
> For developing this port, we should remove certain device drivers these
> are manage missing device on Arduino. These drivers are: Floppy disk
Look. The Arduino has EIGHT kilobytes of RAM. If you remove
FAT32 and a few other features, the KERNEL without ANY other
drivers still takes mor
Arduino port of FreeDOS has many issues. Certain issues Arduino Port
of FreeDOS are indicated below:
For developing this port, we should remove certain device drivers
these are manage missing device on Arduino. These drivers are: Floppy
disk driver, Hard disk driver, CD-R driver, DVD-R dri
Nice! Was not aware of Night DOS. Looking at the repo now:
https://github.com/mercury0x000d/NightKernel
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Remitente:Mercury
Destinatario: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Fecha:sábado, 13 de enero de
I suggested that too in the past. Took the project up myself and am
still working on it, along with a small group of folks who are interested.
On 01/13/2018 03:49 AM, Bitácora de Javier Gutiérrez Chamorro (Guti) wrote:
Re: [Freedos-devel] Arduino Port of FreeDOS If is a matter of
suggestion, I
If is a matter of suggestion, I would say x86 32 bit protected mode would be
easier and more useful.
I still remember the dead FreeDOS-32.
Anyway I guess real issue is time and motivation to code, not ideas.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Remitente
Of course it is, not implying that it should be the next move by any means.
Freedos has been a "me too" product for many years.
On Jan 13, 2018 6:03 PM, "Ercan Ersoy" wrote:
> I think developing FreeDOS Arduino port through source code changes and
> some optimizations. Microcontrollers using o
I think developing FreeDOS Arduino port through source code changes
and some optimizations. Microcontrollers using on Arduino is Harvard
Architecture. For this reason, FreeDOS Arduino port is requires less
resource than FreeDOS x86 binaries.
FreeDOS Arduino port may not be realized without
10 matches
Mail list logo
