Hi,
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>
> It is even worse than you suggested for Turbo Pascal compiled programs for LF
> only files.
> The entire built-in text I/O system can't go anywhere near such files. If it
> does, you end up
> with an infinite display loop crash.
But
Rugxulo,
It is even worse than you suggested for Turbo Pascal compiled programs for LF
only files. The entire built-in text I/O system can't go anywhere near such
files. If it does, you end up with an infinite display loop crash.
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 5:51 PM, dmccunney wrote:
>>
>> At one point, I had to insert a step in a *nix script that generated
>> and emailed nightly reports. The recipients would get them as
>> attachments on Windows machines, and double click the
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 5:51 PM, dmccunney wrote:
>
> At one point, I had to insert a step in a *nix script that generated
> and emailed nightly reports. The recipients would get them as
> attachments on Windows machines, and double click them to read them,
> which by default invoked Notepad
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>
> As a side note on this issue, there are many dos2unix programs out there.
> But, last time I
> checked (many years ago) very few unix2dos versions.
A quick check at D2U734B.ZIP shows: dos2unix.exe, unix2dos.exe,
mac2unix.exe, unix2m
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 17:40:03 -0500, Jerome Shidel wrote:
> Other than install and remove, I don’t think
> FDNPKG & FDINST do anything with them.
FDNPKG & FDINST only read the LSM files indeed, and they are designed to
handle both CR/LF and LF line endings ("a line ends with a single LF" +
"if it
On 1/19/2017 3:51 PM, dmccunney wrote:
> How many things available as part of FreeDOS *do* have problems with
> LF only EOL markers in text files?
There are several older compiler which will choke big time, so is likely
a lot of shareware stuff like AsEasyAs or older DOS text editors, dBASE,
etc.
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Ralf Quint wrote:
> On 1/19/2017 2:40 PM, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>> Eric, You and Tom are correct. But, so is Rugxulo.
> Consistency is king...
>> Is it a problem?
>>
> Potentially, yes, as someone might try to open up an LSM file after
> install with a real DOS prog
On 1/19/2017 2:40 PM, Jerome Shidel wrote:
> Eric, You and Tom are correct. But, so is Rugxulo.
Consistency is king...
> Is it a problem?
>
Potentially, yes, as someone might try to open up an LSM file after
install with a real DOS program that does NOT be able to handle LF-only
line endings.
Whe
Eric, You and Tom are correct. But, so is Rugxulo.
Is it a problem?
As far as I know, only three programs every touch the LSM files. FDNPKG, FDINST
and
FDIMPLES. Other than install and remove, I don’t think FDNPKG & FDINST do
anything
with them. FDIMPLES uses them along with other files and da
On 1/19/2017 1:16 PM, Eric Auer wrote:
> Rugxulo, Tom,
>
> DOS files should always use DOS linebreaks,
> even if some DOS apps can deal with Unix ones.
+1
It's just too bad that a lot of people are seeing FreeDOS just as
another (low end) Linux these days...
Ralf
---
This email has been checked
Rugxulo, Tom,
DOS files should always use DOS linebreaks,
even if some DOS apps can deal with Unix ones.
Even in Windows, if it is wrong with Notepad,
it does not help that Wordpad can deal with it.
In short, I recommend a recode to DOS linebreaks
and DOS codepage for the LSM files, easy enough
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote:
>
> in the APPINFO directory, the LSM files are formatted UNIX style LF,
> and not DOS style CR LF
Okay, but can't FD EDIT handle that okay? Or is there a different
problem? Or is it just aesthetically annoying because it's not truly
native?
in the APPINFO directory, the LSM files are formatted UNIX style LF,
and not DOS style CR LF
btw: I'm no longer able to locate FreeDOS sources for FIND and it's
maintainer from freedos.org.
Tom
--
Check out the vibran
14 matches
Mail list logo
