Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

On Sun, 25 Oct 2020, Eric Auer wrote: Do you say in the Unix group, only TAIL and UPTIME have license issues? Any other packages in other categories? If tail and uptime are the only issues I can solve the former: I've got a PD (it's unambiguous that this was the author's intent; it says "Cop

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

Hi Jim, a few short additional thoughts: > But CAB files? No DOS system distributed files in CAB format I remember DOS drivers for stuff like soundcards shipping as part of some Windows installers. So it helps to be able to dig into files meant for Windows, without needing any Windows or Wine, bu

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

On Sat, 24 Oct 2020, Random Liegh via Freedos-devel wrote: What DOS was, in my mind, was simple. You didn't really have an entire tree with documents in one place, helpfiles in another and LSM files in a third. You had -for MS DOS, c:\dos. Everything was there. It's been a long time, but I

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

On 10/24/2020 3:26 PM, Jim Hall wrote: On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 6:06 PM Jerome Shidel > wrote: Hi, If I don’t mention removing or keeping something, I don’t have much of an opinion on it. Over time, FreeDOS has grown to include lots of interesting

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 3:22 PM Eric Auer wrote: > > Hi Jim, good to think about the package list :-) > > If you ask me, the distro has grown large because a SMALL > number of packages are rather LARGE. Even then, when you > do not install all sources, it uses a lot less space: It > would be fine

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 6:06 PM Jerome Shidel wrote: > Hi, > > If I don’t mention removing or keeping something, I don’t have much of an > opinion on it. > > Over time, FreeDOS has grown to include lots of interesting programs. The > FreeDOS 1.2 and 1.3RCx distributions are very big. > > As we lo

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

Hi, If I don’t mention removing or keeping something, I don’t have much of an opinion on it. > Over time, FreeDOS has grown to include lots of interesting programs. The > FreeDOS 1.2 and 1.3RCx distributions are very big. > > As we look to the next FreeDOS 1.3 Release Candidate, I think we sho

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

On Sat, 24 Oct 2020, Eric Auer wrote: I guess the complete DJGPP ecosystem could be moved to a separate group, it can get really big. DJGPP is practically an OS unto itself. I would move RUNTIME to some generic tool category. I believe Regina REXX was not very small, while some others ar

Re: [Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

Hi Jim, good to think about the package list :-) If you ask me, the distro has grown large because a SMALL number of packages are rather LARGE. Even then, when you do not install all sources, it uses a lot less space: It would be fine to keep the sources zipped until one wants to work on a speci

[Freedos-devel] Simplifying FreeDOS

Some of us had this conversation a while back and I wanted to bring it up again on the list. MS-DOS was a small operating system. MS_DOS 5 and 6 fit on a few 1.44MB floppy disks. We always intended FreeDOS to not just *replace* but *enhance* DOS. FreeDOS is "MS-DOS plus more." To make clear what'

[Freedos-devel] Obsolete DJGPP in upcomming FreeDos 1.3

One can see from http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/repositories/1.3/devel/ that distribution contains outdated versions: - DJGPP-2.03 - Current version is 2.05 - gcc-4.7.1 - current version is 10.2.0 I did not test more. It should be nice to update to newer versions.