On 8/31/2020 7:16 PM, Jon Brase wrote:
> Not that convincing rationale considering rather modest overhead
necessary.
Recall that FreeDOS isn't just about having a FOSS alternative to
MS-DOS for modern machines (where you're really better off just using
Linux and DOSBox), or for your
> I'm not sure, but probably a program can distinguish whether it's in
> "interactive mode" or used for batch processing? It seems like this should be
> possible, but I don't think it is. I've tried doing something similar
> (though not quite the same), where I tried to automatically detect
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 1:35 AM Jon Brase wrote:
>
> > Not that convincing rationale considering rather modest overhead necessary.
>
> Recall that FreeDOS isn't just about having a FOSS alternative to MS-DOS for
> modern machines (where you're really better off just using Linux and DOSBox),
> or
On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 09:16:54PM -0500, Jon Brase wrote:
> Recall that FreeDOS isn't just about having a FOSS alternative to MS-DOS
> for modern machines (where you're really better off just using Linux and
> DOSBox), or for your early-90s 486 retrogaming machine, it's also meant
> to be an
On 01/09/2020 04:16, Jon Brase wrote:
it's also meant to be an alternative to MS-DOS for the very oldest PC hardware,
all the way back to the original IBM 5150. The core software might therefore be
expected to work in very little RAM. As I recall, the minimum configuration for
the 5150 had
--
We have only a few rules for posting to the FreeDOS mailing lists:
1. NO HATE SPEECH OR BULLYING
Make sure everyone feels safe. Bullying of any kind isn't allowed,
and degrading comments about things like race,
