[Freedos-kernel] builds for testing purpose
In case you want to help test the FreeDOS kernel, but either do not want to or can not [easily] do cvs builds, there are now daily (not that the kernel actually changes that often) builds available along with source at http://www.fdos.org/kernel/ Please see http://www.fdos.org/kernel/.README for a list/description of a files available. I make no guarentee that filenames will not change, but the .README will be updated to reflect any such changes (should only occur if I add additional build variants). The simplist approach is just get KERNEL.SYS to help test the stable branch or get KERNEL.dev.SYS (and rename to KERNEL.SYS) to help test the development branch. [Similar there is SYS.COM and SYS.dev.COM] Otherwise, download the zip file matching the kernel and build options you wish to help test. Currently available are kernels built with Borland's Turbo C and OpenWatcom 1.2, including with/without Fat32 and 86+ or 386+ only. Presently all are UPX'd, though if requested I may provide uncompressed builds. These builds are provided ONLY for testing! Please do not expect any support for using them unless you are willing to do some work yourself to help track down and test the issue (but still no guarentees anyone will help you or that they won't trash your system). Thanks, Jeremy --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php ___ Freedos-kernel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
[Freedos-kernel] Re: Broken VERSION= in 2035 etc. - too many kernels
Hi! If it is broke in stable and fixed in dev, then it should be fixed in head soon. Please people, the kernels are not Lucho/Arkady vs Tom/..., they are stable and development (unstable). Well I can only give people the Lucho or the SF homepage URL if they want a kernel BINARY. If I understand right, we NOW have the Tom and the CVS SF binaries online, too? Which SF binaries, 2035 plus stable plus dev? Or is stable the same as 2035? And if I understand right, The CVS dev branch contains most Lucho / Arkady patches? Are there patches which are rejected even in dev, or does that mean that CVS dev is - after some delay - the same as the kernel on Luchos homepage? And CVS stable is one kernel which collects all useful/stable updates since 2035, similar to Toms kernel but not the same? Any quick-to-describe differences between Tom and Jeremy-CVS-dev? See history.txt in the docs directory. Accesible through the CVS web viewer for the dev and stable branches? Also see http://www.fdos.org/kernel/head2unstable.diff if you are curious of the difference (minus new files) between stable dev. Nice idea, but that is 554394 lines (bzip2 compressed would be 115k) in ONE file, pretty tricky to fetch a collection of patches from that 16613 line (71622 words) file unless you know verrry well which patches you want. I'm still reviewing the patches in the dev branch and merging into stable. Any that make it in that others strongly disagree with can always be reverted... Thanks a lot, that definitely takes a lot of your spare time. You could put up an online feedback system where people can download single patches and 'upload' comments (like a grade / degree of confidence in 'does not introduce bugs' / 'improves kernel' / 'does not change semantics' (or does change them, fixing a bug) terms). That would allow to split the work a bit. Eric PS: Interesting... FreeDOS in the news http://www.windowsfordevices.com/articles/AT6292162763.html SmallBasic QBASIC DJGPP: http://smallbasic.sourceforge.net/ (I think a DJGPP version is really fine, no need for an 8086 port... if the SmallBasic people need help with some features, let me know...) PPS: download ISO to C:\ so you end up with C:\FDBOOTCD.ISO file... then the FreeDOS installer mounts it? Why on earth...? Why not just COPY the files on the ISO to c:\temp, then boot some DOS and FreeCOM, cdd c:\temp, start the installer there? If you are clever enough to copy a whole ISO to a PC which cannot boot from CD, then you will be even more happy about being able to copy the files - which is even simpler than copying the ISO, if you have to use floppy or slow link cables / network. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php ___ Freedos-kernel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
Re: [Freedos-kernel] Re: Broken VERSION= in 2035 etc. - too many kernels
Eric Auer wrote: Hi! If it is broke in stable and fixed in dev, then it should be fixed in head soon. Please people, the kernels are not Lucho/Arkady vs Tom/..., they are stable and development (unstable). Well I can only give people the Lucho or the SF homepage URL if they want a kernel BINARY. If I understand right, we NOW have the Tom and the CVS SF binaries online, too? Which SF binaries, Not sure about Tom, but yes there are binaries from unmodified [sourceforge kernel] cvs now. 2035 plus stable plus dev? Or is stable the same as 2035? SF only contains release binaries, which presently is 2035 and soon will add 2035a. On my site are the cvs binaries as they are meant only for testing. And if I understand right, The CVS dev branch contains most Lucho / Arkady patches? Are there patches which are rejected even in dev, or does that mean that CVS dev is - after some delay - the same as the kernel on Luchos homepage? And CVS stable is one kernel Lucho's homepage refers to cvs unstable branch last I checked. which collects all useful/stable updates since 2035, similar to Toms kernel but not the same? Any quick-to-describe differences yes between Tom and Jeremy-CVS-dev? I haven't reviewed Tom's kernel yet. See history.txt in the docs directory. Accesible through the CVS web viewer for the dev and stable branches? Should be, don't have the URL handy though. Also see http://www.fdos.org/kernel/head2unstable.diff if you are curious of the difference (minus new files) between stable dev. Nice idea, but that is 554394 lines (bzip2 compressed would be 115k) in ONE file, pretty tricky to fetch a collection of patches from that 16613 line (71622 words) file unless you know verrry well which patches you want. Well, its the diff file I use to apply patches to stable, so its hard for me to give you the mini patches you request -- I followed the discussions as they were posted to the list and that is still the archives are still the best place to pick and choose them from. I'm still reviewing the patches in the dev branch and merging into stable. Any that make it in that others strongly disagree with can always be reverted... Thanks a lot, that definitely takes a lot of your spare time. You could put up an online feedback system where people can download single patches and 'upload' comments (like a grade / degree of confidence in 'does not introduce bugs' / 'improves kernel' / 'does not change semantics' (or does change them, fixing a bug) terms). That would allow to split the work a bit. The catch is, from experience I've found people don't generally comment if things are liked, only if they are disliked. Eric ... Sorry for not replying better, but I'm late for work as it is. Jeremy --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php ___ Freedos-kernel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel
