Re: [Freedos-user] Print via USB

[Eric Auer]

G'day Bryan,

>> That would of course be the EASIEST option as long as your PC
>> and your printer both still have Centronics connectivity
> 
> The PC does, but the printer doesn't. Hm, I found the following.
> {USB to Parallel Bi-Directional Cable
> 
>     USB to Parallel Bi-Directional Cable   
> 
> USB to Parallel Bi-Directional Cable
> CAT.NO:XC4847
> Parallel printer ports have disappeared from most modern desk top
> computers and virtually all new notebook computers. This is not a problem}
> https://www.jaycar.com.au/usb-to-parallel-bi-directional-cable/p/XC4847

That sounds more like a cable for printers which have
Centronics and PC which have none. You would need the
other way round, but I think that would not help much.

Probably better to use network or USB :-)

Let us see what others say about your network chip in DOS.
Note that if your printer is of the GDI variety, you will
not be able to print from DOS *at all* without adding a
computer with GDI drivers as translator between your DOS
computer and your printer. If the printer understands
a language for which you have a DOS tool which speaks
it, such as HP PCL, ESC/P, PostScript, PDF or plain
text, you CAN print directly from DOS as soon as you
find a way to send data through suitable communication
channels between the two: Network drivers and netcat
or MS CLIENT, USB drivers and TYPE, COPY or similar?

Regards, Eric

PS: We have GhostScript for PostScript processing and
our "print screen hotkey" TSR exist for HP PCL, ESC/P
and PostScript output. We have PDF viewers and it might
be possible to use GhostScript to create PDF? Not sure.
Some text editors also have built-in output converters.



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Print via USB

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Thanks, Frank:


Epson dot matrix printers (ESC*P language) were perfectly willing to
print individual characters, a line at a time I guess. They were
(are) line printers and the ESC*P "language" is little more than an
"extension" of raw ASCII + control characters (CR, LF, FF etc)
by "escape sequences on top" - for switching fonts and maybe more
complex tasks.


Back in the day, I wrote in PROLOG, a custom word-processor outputting 
from my DOS palmtop to a dot-matrix printer.



Laser printer formats are page-oriented, and are not "evolved from
plain ASCII" in the way that sending a paragraph of raw ASCII text
would yield visible output on paper, even if a "formfeed" provokes
the printer to load paper and print a page (not sure if this even
works). Even in PCL, you need to provide some commands to the
printer, to place some text on the page and get it "rendered on
paper". Let alone PostScript - quite a tightly specified "well
formed" format.

Obviously you can embed bitmaps in PCL and PostScript print jobs.
Esc*P can do it too. When printing from modern software, every page
can be just a huge embedded bitmap. And, there are printers that can
*only* print bitmaps, albeit in a thin wrap of some standardized
format: think PCLm (in spite of its name, it is a gutted / stripped
down version of PDF).


Is there some DOS software package that can take an input text file and 
output formatted for a modern laser printer?

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Print via USB

[Bryan Kilgallin]

G'day Eric:


Not sure which network chip your PC has?


networkNetLink BCM57788 Gigabit Ethernet PCIe


That would of course be the EASIEST option as long as your PC
and your printer both still have Centronics connectivity


The PC does, but the printer doesn't. Hm, I found the following.
{USB to Parallel Bi-Directional Cable

USB to Parallel Bi-Directional Cable

USB to Parallel Bi-Directional Cable
CAT.NO:XC4847
Parallel printer ports have disappeared from most modern desk top 
computers and virtually all new notebook computers. This is not a problem}

https://www.jaycar.com.au/usb-to-parallel-bi-directional-cable/p/XC4847
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Print via USB

[Bryan Kilgallin]

So, Frank:


Install Samba on your Linux PC. It may take a wee bit of learning to
configure, but it does not bite back. I can help with snippets of
config to make it accept ancient DOS clients.

Install the Microsoft Network Client for MS-DOS. You can install this
from scratch, or you can try using/refactoring the NetBootDisk:
https://www.netbootdisk.com/floppy/download.htm

...and then redirect the LPT device:

NET USE LPT1: \\my_samba_server\printer_queue
I take it the DOS PC will tell the Linux PC to print! This seems a bit 
complicated.

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 4:35 PM Eric Auer  wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> the current Diskman website links to archive.org for some of
> the content and "inside" the archived website you can jump to
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070206182142/http://www.diskman.co.uk/license.aspx
>
> Which contains the following, as of 2/2007, emphasis added by me:
[..]


Yes, that list raises a number of issues. To summarize what you quoted:

- freeware for non-commercial use (free for home users)
- commercial or military users need a license (can try it for up to 30 days)
- charities and non-commercial users need an agreement
- you cannot use for computer manufacture or "recovery" work
- you cannot distribute, except as the original file
- you cannot charge to distribute
- you cannot include on a download site without permission


So yes, that definitely doesn't allow FreeDOS to share a copy of Diskman.


> As you have already mailed the author, we should just wait whether he
> can offer the source code AND a more free license. I THINK the tool
> would be a rather nice addition to our collection :-)
>

Yes, I'll let you know if/when I hear back from him.


Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[dmccunney]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 5:17 PM Thomas Desi  wrote:
>
> Hi Dennis, I *love* your TextEditors.org site! Thanks for your work!

Thank you. I don't believe the site is high volume, but I don't care.
Every once in a while I get an email from someone thanking me because
TextEdiors provided info or a download for something they had been
looking for for a long time.  I smile happily.,. That's why I maintain
the site and what makes it with doing.

> Coincidentally, I was just this moment browsing 
> http://www.lanet.lv/simtel.net/msdos/editor-pre.html
> and it looks like all are broken links.

Likely because Simtel.net no longer exists.  I can usually find the
stuff in other repositories, but I don't know I have to till someone
like you points it out

Keeping links updated is an ongoing challenge I haven't usually got
the time to devote to.

My reference was simply explaining my thinking about licenses. I want
editors to be available.  I don't *care* what the license is.  What
the user does because of a license is up to them. I don't get to tell
them what to do, and *shouldn't*..

> -Thomas
>
> NB: Some authors of an earlier era still living up to the idea that holding 
> the software and/or source or sort-of-registration-process/registration fee 
> etc. might still yield some income. Software market dynamics have changed so 
> much since then (1990ies, DOS times) that more is lost then free the software 
> at least for archives to study, try, play or even work with it. Most of it is 
> of little commercial use on a large scale. (This should/could be read in the 
> light of the »FSF« ideas, too.)

If there are authors still attempting to monetize their work, and are
still actively supporting it when the user buys a license, I'm
thrilled.

I simply see a need for Freedos users to *find* them, starting from
the Freedos page.  Fine by me if that location isn't on Ibiblio,  but
there needs to be a pointer *from* the Freedos site to where it is.

> Maybe it would need a broader manifesto about this issue and distributed in 
> time before most of it is lost in digital oblivion? (See editor-list above 
> and many many other sites/links)

Possible.  I am all about preserving software and data like this.  I
am *not* fussy about the method.  I am only concerned that it *works.*
__
Dennis


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 4:00 PM dmccunney  wrote:
>[..]
> You don't host non open source software on Ibiblio.
>
> Fair enough, but there needs to be a place to put "Free to use" but
> *not* open source that will be of use to Freedos (and DOS in general
> users) and useful used on DOS/Freedos.  It requires written permission
> to host for download?  What if the author has long since vanished and
> the product is abandonware and you can't *get* it? Being in violation
> of the license wouldn't  be a concern here.  Who on Earth might go you
> after about it?
>
> I am principal maintainer for a site called TextEditors.org  The focus
> is what it says in site name.  It's a wiki anyone can update.  If it's
> a text editor running on a device, the wiki wants to document it.  The
> hardware is runs on might be anything from an IBM Mainframe to a
> pocket calculator.
>
> Licenses also vary.  An editor may be explicitly commercial,
> shareware, freeware, open source, or abandonware, where the code and
> docs are available but the author has long since vanished from the
> Internet.  I don't care.  I just specify what the license *is*, The
> one area where I draw a line is abandoned shareware. If it's
> abandoned, but the editor is fully functional without being
> registered,, I'll host it.  If it's abandoned shareware that will not
> fully function without a license, and it's not possible to register it
> because long gone authors, I see no point to have it available.
>
> A lot  of stuff I host is historical and long gone., as is the
> hardware it ran on.  I do my best to provide pointers to documentation
> so viewers can learn about what it was, did, and its place in computer
> history.

Interesting wiki. I looked up BRIEF but didn't find a download link on the wiki:
http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Brief

I also found WordStar but didn't see a download link on the wiki:
http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WordStar

I found SEDIT (shareware) in the wiki, but the download link points to
a Simtel mirror owned by someone named Michael Scovetta:
http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SEDIT


When you say you'll "host" it even if it's proprietary software, do
you mean you actually have a copy of the editor on your site, and
people can download it from your site? Or do you mean "host" as
"there's an entry for it in the wiki"?

Putting an entry in a wiki is different than offering a file for
download. When you offer a file for download, you are distributing it.
And that gets into copyright territory.

Yes, I know that some of these programs are effectively "abandoned"
and the owners seem to be gone. But do you know if the owner is
actually gone? Or did someone else (perhaps another company) swoop in
and buy the rights? There are other examples where someone has
purchased the rights to some really old software, and then come back
to sue someone. For example, DR-DOS (Caldera). I don't want to
entangle FreeDOS in the next "Caldera" suit. Especially since we don't
have a "FreeDOS Foundation" to provide air cover. (Creating a
Foundation is expensive.)


>
> I think there needs to be a repository for stuff like Eric mentioned,
> with a pointer to the site from the Freedos.org home page explicitly
> stating "Only free and open source software may be hosted on Ibiblio.
> This URL points to a site not on Ibiblio with software that was
> recommended by Freedos user as generally useful DOS sofwaret that is
> free but *not* open source.  If interested you may find it *here*."
>
> My concern is providing copies of and information *about* DOS and  DOS
> software.  If the software is free to use but *not* open source, I
> don't care.  It may not be posted *on* Ibiblio, but DOS/Freedos users
> should be able to *find* it, with a pointer on Freedos.org to
> somewhere other than Ibiblio where it might live.
>

Do you mean like the "Links" page on the FreeDOS website, that links
to (among other places) archives of shareware games and other
applications?
https://www.freedos.org/links/

>From my other emails a few weeks ago about updating the FreeDOS
website, I'm looking to move the "Links" content to other, more
visible landing pages. For example:
https://test.freedos.org/

And the https://test.freedos.org/about/games/ page (linked from the
"Play Games" info box on the front page) says this:

>On this page, we'll list a few cool games that you can run on
>FreeDOS. If it's gratis, we'll also provide links. Also include
>links to the games archives (from the Links page). [I think by
>including the content from the Links page into the other pages, I
>can probably do away with the Links page.]

And the https://test.freedos.org/about/apps/ page (linked from the
"Legacy Apps" info box on the front page) says this:

>On this page, we'll list a few cool and free (gratis)
>applications that you can download and run on FreeDOS. If it's
>gratis, we'll also provide links.


I think that's what you are suggesting. Or are you suggesting some
other 

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Thomas Desi]

Thank you, Jim for this overview on roff - groff. 
And, by the way, if someone is about music typesetting, check out 
http://lilypond.org/   which is kind-of-similar to *roff but for music. 
The score can be written as code on FreeDOS with any text editor ;-)
-Thomas

> On Sat,20210501- week17, at 23:00, Jim Hall  wrote:
> 
>> On 4/25/2021 10:43 PM, TK Chia wrote:
> [..]
>>> troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
>>> And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
>>> Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 1:54 AM Ralf Quint  wrote:
>> Well, it all depends on what you are used to. I haven't used any of that
>> troff (etc) stuff in +30 years now, ever since GUI deskops and apps for
>> it started to become usable.
> [..]
> 
> BTW, if anyone is interested in troff (or variants) there's an
> interesting history in Brian Kernighan's book, "Unix: A History and a
> Memoir." It starts on page 98. In brief:
> 
> Jerry Saltzer's Runoff program was an early text formatting system,
> originally for CTSS. It used macros like this:
> 
> .ce
> This is a centered (ce) line.
> .ti 5
> This line has a starting text indent (ti) of 5 spaces.
> 
> 
> While at MIT, Kernighan wrote a simple implementation of Runoff called
> Roff ("an abbreviated Runoff")
> 
> Joe Ossanna at Bell Labs (Unix team) later wrote a similar but more
> powerful implementation called Nroff (for "New Roff") that generated
> output suitable for the typewriter-like printers at the time
> 
> When the Unix team acquired a phototypesetting machine, Joe made
> significant updates to Nroff to create Troff (for "Typesetter Roff")
> to drive the typesetter
> 
> Kernighan later updated Troff to become the Device Independent Troff
> (still called "Troff" but I've also seen this referenced as "ditroff")
> with a typesetter description language that allowed Troff to produce
> output for different kinds of devices
> 
> And much later, GNU wrote a new implementation called Groff ("GNU Roff")
> 
> 
> I've written a few articles for OpenSource.com about using groff. The
> latest one is here:
> https://opensource.com/article/21/4/groff-programmer
> 
> (It even includes a groff source file using the "-me" macros)
> 
> 
> At the time, writing documents in nroff/troff/groff was as common as
> writing documentation in Markdown today.
> 
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jim,

the current Diskman website links to archive.org for some of
the content and "inside" the archived website you can jump to

http://web.archive.org/web/20070206182142/http://www.diskman.co.uk/license.aspx

Which contains the following, as of 2/2007, emphasis added by me:

"- Diskman is licensed as freeware for non-commercial use. Anybody can
download it and use it free of charge, for any purpose they see fit,
provided that the following conditions are met:

- Diskman can only be used for non-commercial purposes ('commercial'
includes use *for profit making* activities, *military* purposes or
incorporation within *any product or service for which a fee is
levied*) without a license.

- Diskman is also available on commercial terms. To license Diskman for
your commercial purposes please contact the author with details of the
purpose that it will be used for. Diskman may be evaluated for
commercial purposes for a period of thirty days. Commercially licensed
versions of Diskman will clearly indicate that they have been licensed
and have a clear notice of the conditions that they have been
distributed under. In most cases Diskman will be licensed for commercial
use without a fee being levied but this remains at the authors absolute
discretion.

- Diskman may not be used during the manufacture of computers or for
mission critical recovery work (see the disclaimer) without the authors
permission.

- Diskman may be freely used by any home user for an indefinite period
of time provided that they either downloaded it directly from this
website or received it in the package available for download from this
website and not, under any circumstances, as part of a product or service.

- Diskman may usually be used, free of charge, by any charity or
non-commercial organisation (including law enforcement) subject to
agreement with the author.

- The program is *not to be distributed* in any form other than that
available for download from this website or directly from the author.
- The program may be distributed provided that no charge is made for
program and that any charges for distribution are only to cover
reasonable media costs (< US$10)

- *Diskman may not be included on any internet download site* other than
that provided by the Diskman website *without the prior permission* of
the author. It is acceptable to link to the Diskman website but not to
a specific download (it won't work anyway!).

- Some revisions of Diskman are still beta software and must therefore
be used with great care. Other versions of Diskman marked 'stable' will
have been tested for an extended period of time by a large number of
users. In either case the author accepts no liability for any damage
that use of Diskman may cause. Please see the disclaimer for further
details."

However, the CURRENT website just provides version 4.2(A3) last alpha
release and NO license page. It simply says:

"Diskman is no longer under development. The following downloads are
provided for historical reasons and are not provided with any support."

As you have already mailed the author, we should just wait whether he
can offer the source code AND a more free license. I THINK the tool
would be a rather nice addition to our collection :-)

Regards, Eric




___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] FreeDOS on UEFI and other present and future hardware tricks

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jim, everybody,

> I get a lot of the emails you described. People email me to ask why
> FreeDOS doesn't run on their Raspberry Pi like Linux does .. or why
> FreeDOS can't take advantage of multiple CPUs and cores like Linux
> does .. or why FreeDOS can't run on their UEFI-only system (no
> "Legacy" mode) like Windows can .. or why FreeDOS doesn't have a
> default GUI like Windows .. or the one [...] from the Facebook
> group asking how to run an Apache/MySQL/PHP stack on [...] FreeDOS

Actually I have been some of this as part of a long discussion
with Stas this week. As you may know, support for BIOS and even
for VGA and VESA VBE seems to have declined significantly 2020.

And for various reasons, Stas has spent a lot of work to pull
most of the FreeDOS kernel over into the protected mode space
in context of dosemu2. That module is now called fdpp. It lacks
the init-text and the hma-text part runs on the Linux side,
with dosemu-specific connectors residing on the DOS side.

This makes it somewhat convoluted to "package" the heavily
updated fdpp kernel back into a classic "kernel.sys loaded by
a boot sector" infrastructure again and of course some things
are now optimized for protected mode. So it can be frustrating
that many updates for the kernel have ended up somewhat out of
reach, backporting them would require tedious cherry picking.

But exactly that would allow an interesting scenario: You may
remember that VMware has their ESXi "operating system", actually
hypervisor, which boots on raw hardware and lets you start and
manage instances of VMware virtual machines.

Now imagine that you have a minimal protected mode "operating
system" which boots on UEFI hardware and loads one task which
simulates a BIOS, similar to what normal CSM for UEFI do. It
also loads other tasks which simulate VGA hardware with the
appropriate BIOS and VESA VBE, or a Sound Blaster 16 hardware
with yet another task pipelining the audio to some HDA driver.

The next task runs the fdpp kernel and yet another opens some
vm8086 task where all of the other stuff is used to create a
virtual environment where you can pretend that you are running
the normal rest of your FreeDOS installation on hardware while
in fact having just the right amount of virtualization layers
between you and the hardware :-)

This might be more feasible than it sounds (Stas had been told
that pulling the kernel into Linux space would be impossible
as well - it took a LOT of work, but it worked) and might be
yet another interesting idea for future hardware use along the
lines of for example:

- https://github.com/Baron-von-Riedesel Japheth's 64-bit HIMEM
  (also his JLM system for drivers in protected mode realm)

- http://ndn.muxe.com/download/ Necromancer's DOS Navigator,
  which has a 64-bit DPMI edition

- some libraries and proof of concept things for multi-core
  or multi-threading inside DOS applications

- https://dosbox-x.com/ which includes a version which lets
  you run DOSBOX inside DOS with Japheth's HX RT extender,
  so you can run DOS inside DOS and get emulated hardware

- http://mpxplay.sourceforge.net/ which plays audio and video
  even in DOS and even with modern sound hardware and network

- VSB https://www.dosforum.de/viewtopic.php?t=1188 (which I
  have mirrored, too) is an ancient Sound Blaster 1 simulation
  with I/O trapping to pipeline sound to Covox printer port D/A
  either by MS EMM386 I/O trap API or creates vm86 task itself

- https://cmaiolino.wordpress.com/dosbian/ which boots a minimal
  Linux to open Dosbox so you can use DOS on Raspberry Pi and
  other ARM-based hardware which is not DOS compatible at all

So I think tricks and modules which connect the DOS world to
new hardware and firmware worlds and help DOS apps to use the
abilities of hardware which has not existed in MS DOS times
are something which are getting increasingly interesting.

For people with REALLY old hardware (before 386) it is great
that our classic kernel can be compiled for 8086 and I would
like to remind everybody that FreeCOM command.com has a KSSF
special helper version to save RAM on 8086 where no XMS is
available for the XMS SWAP which is the "default" for us in
spite of not working on 8086. That makes the default FreeCOM
binary a memory hog until you load some HIMEM.

But even for something as "humble" as a Live CD which needs
at least a 486 to boot (simply because older BIOS rarely is
able to boot from CD, although you can use a loader floppy)
we COULD actually decide to be a lot more modern regarding
system requirements. And if a protected mode kernel can be
part of a FreeDOS CD which boots from UEFI-only hardware?

Well, why not. The thing is that writing some hypervisor is
going to require serious experts. Not available? Then how
about making a clone of DOSBIAN, but for, say, PC compatible
computers with at least a Pentium and maybe 32 MB RAM? That
would still be totally FreeDOS related :-)

In spite of always keeping support for ALL 

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Thomas Desi]

Hi Dennis, I *love* your TextEditors.org site! Thanks for your work! 
Coincidentally, I was just this moment browsing 
http://www.lanet.lv/simtel.net/msdos/editor-pre.html
and it looks like all are broken links. 

-Thomas

NB: Some authors of an earlier era still living up to the idea that holding the 
software and/or source or sort-of-registration-process/registration fee etc. 
might still yield some income. Software market dynamics have changed so much 
since then (1990ies, DOS times) that more is lost then free the software at 
least for archives to study, try, play or even work with it. Most of it is of 
little commercial use on a large scale. (This should/could be read in the light 
of the »FSF« ideas, too.)

Maybe it would need a broader manifesto about this issue and distributed in 
time before most of it is lost in digital oblivion? (See editor-list above and 
many many other sites/links)




> On Sat,20210501- week17, at 22:58, dmccunney  
> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:26 PM Jim Hall  wrote:
>> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 10:59 AM Eric Auer  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"
>> I'm not sure why that was on Ibiblio. We can only include open source
>> software on the Ibiblio site.
> 
> You don't host non open source software on Ibiblio.
> 
> Fair enough, but there needs to be a place to put "Free to use" but
> *not* open source that will be of use to Freedos (and DOS in general
> users) and useful used on DOS/Freedos.  It requires written permission
> to host for download?  What if the author has long since vanished and
> the product is abandonware and you can't *get* it? Being in violation
> of the license wouldn't  be a concern here.  Who on Earth might go you
> after about it?
> 
> I am principal maintainer for a site called TextEditors.org  The focus
> is what it says in site name.  It's a wiki anyone can update.  If it's
> a text editor running on a device, the wiki wants to document it.  The
> hardware is runs on might be anything from an IBM Mainframe to a
> pocket calculator.
> 
> Licenses also vary.  An editor may be explicitly commercial,
> shareware, freeware, open source, or abandonware, where the code and
> docs are available but the author has long since vanished from the
> Internet.  I don't care.  I just specify what the license *is*, The
> one area where I draw a line is abandoned shareware. If it's
> abandoned, but the editor is fully functional without being
> registered,, I'll host it.  If it's abandoned shareware that will not
> fully function without a license, and it's not possible to register it
> because long gone authors, I see no point to have it available.
> 
> A lot  of stuff I host is historical and long gone., as is the
> hardware it ran on.  I do my best to provide pointers to documentation
> so viewers can learn about what it was, did, and its place in computer
> history.
> 
> I think there needs to be a repository for stuff like Eric mentioned,
> with a pointer to the site from the Freedos.org home page explicitly
> stating "Only free and open source software may be hosted on Ibiblio.
> This URL points to a site not on Ibiblio with software that was
> recommended by Freedos user as generally useful DOS sofwaret that is
> free but *not* open source.  If interested you may find it *here*."
> 
> My concern is providing copies of and information *about* DOS and  DOS
> software.  If the software is free to use but *not* open source, I
> don't care.  It may not be posted *on* Ibiblio, but DOS/Freedos users
> should be able to *find* it, with a pointer on Freedos.org to
> somewhere other than Ibiblio where it might live.
> 
>> Jim
> ___
> Dennis
> 
> 
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:25 PM Eric Auer  wrote:
>[..]
> > I downloaded 4.2.a3 from the author's website
> > http://www.diskman.co.uk/ and while there's no Readme
> > file, running the program prints this notice:
> >
> >> Licensed to : ALPHA RELEASE. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE...
>
> The list of versions (on the website, viewed through
> archive.org, as written) also suggests that, but how
> about the most recent stable release 4.x instead then?
>

The notice I copied into my last email was the output from the latest
version on the Diskman website. If you visit http://www.diskman.co.uk/
you'll see there's only one version available to download. Here's the
text from the website:

>
> Diskman4 (1999-2004)
>
> Diskman was a non-commercial DOS-based software project I
> developed from 1999-2004. The last release was Diskman4.
>
> Diskman is no longer under development. The following downloads
> are provided for historical reasons and are not provided with any
> support.
>
> (icon) Diskman4.2(A3) Last Release
>


> If the website still is active, the software may
> still be freeware for non-commercial, non-violent
> use BUT shareware for the rest, which might be an
> issue for fitting it into our licensing policies?
>

(Interesting that you say "non-violent use" .. I didn't see that in
the license. Maybe you meant something else?)

Yes, that would be an issue. While the license says that you "may be
used freely for non-commercial purposes" it also says "may not be
copied, distributed, modified, or incorporated within any product or
service." That means we can't distribute it from Ibiblio.

And including Diskman (with this license) in the FreeDOS distribution
is a non-starter. We know that some people use FreeDOS commercially
(for example, you can still buy new laptops and PCs that have FreeDOS
pre-installed). Including Diskmam (with this license) in the
distribution means commercial users cannot use this program. That
would effectively "poison" FreeDOS for commercial users, which is not
good.

We used to include a few "closed source but free to use and
distribute" programs in FreeDOS, but we've also been burned a few
times by that. I don't want to go through that again. That's why I'm
so focused that any future FreeDOS should only include open source
software.

Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Eric,

> interesting that the DISKMAN website just WORKED.
> The idea to view it using archive.org came from
> Robert, maybe it did not work from his area? Odd.

It's not odd:
In private mail, at first, I cited something from
.
Then I sent two archive.org links, because that's exactly how they
appear in the "Useful Links" section at .

Cheers,
Robert
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page: https://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead: https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jim Hall]

> On 4/25/2021 10:43 PM, TK Chia wrote:
[..]
> > troff (as groff) is still very much alive today, as far as I can tell.
> > And the troff format is still the default source format for man pages on
> > Linux.  It is quite a good format for the job, if you ask me.

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 1:54 AM Ralf Quint  wrote:
> Well, it all depends on what you are used to. I haven't used any of that
> troff (etc) stuff in +30 years now, ever since GUI deskops and apps for
> it started to become usable.
[..]

BTW, if anyone is interested in troff (or variants) there's an
interesting history in Brian Kernighan's book, "Unix: A History and a
Memoir." It starts on page 98. In brief:

Jerry Saltzer's Runoff program was an early text formatting system,
originally for CTSS. It used macros like this:

.ce
This is a centered (ce) line.
.ti 5
This line has a starting text indent (ti) of 5 spaces.


While at MIT, Kernighan wrote a simple implementation of Runoff called
Roff ("an abbreviated Runoff")

Joe Ossanna at Bell Labs (Unix team) later wrote a similar but more
powerful implementation called Nroff (for "New Roff") that generated
output suitable for the typewriter-like printers at the time

When the Unix team acquired a phototypesetting machine, Joe made
significant updates to Nroff to create Troff (for "Typesetter Roff")
to drive the typesetter

Kernighan later updated Troff to become the Device Independent Troff
(still called "Troff" but I've also seen this referenced as "ditroff")
with a typesetter description language that allowed Troff to produce
output for different kinds of devices

And much later, GNU wrote a new implementation called Groff ("GNU Roff")


I've written a few articles for OpenSource.com about using groff. The
latest one is here:
https://opensource.com/article/21/4/groff-programmer

(It even includes a groff source file using the "-me" macros)


At the time, writing documents in nroff/troff/groff was as common as
writing documentation in Markdown today.


Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[dmccunney]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:26 PM Jim Hall  wrote:
> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 10:59 AM Eric Auer  wrote:
> >
> > Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"
> I'm not sure why that was on Ibiblio. We can only include open source
> software on the Ibiblio site.

You don't host non open source software on Ibiblio.

Fair enough, but there needs to be a place to put "Free to use" but
*not* open source that will be of use to Freedos (and DOS in general
users) and useful used on DOS/Freedos.  It requires written permission
to host for download?  What if the author has long since vanished and
the product is abandonware and you can't *get* it? Being in violation
of the license wouldn't  be a concern here.  Who on Earth might go you
after about it?

I am principal maintainer for a site called TextEditors.org  The focus
is what it says in site name.  It's a wiki anyone can update.  If it's
a text editor running on a device, the wiki wants to document it.  The
hardware is runs on might be anything from an IBM Mainframe to a
pocket calculator.

Licenses also vary.  An editor may be explicitly commercial,
shareware, freeware, open source, or abandonware, where the code and
docs are available but the author has long since vanished from the
Internet.  I don't care.  I just specify what the license *is*, The
one area where I draw a line is abandoned shareware. If it's
abandoned, but the editor is fully functional without being
registered,, I'll host it.  If it's abandoned shareware that will not
fully function without a license, and it's not possible to register it
because long gone authors, I see no point to have it available.

A lot  of stuff I host is historical and long gone., as is the
hardware it ran on.  I do my best to provide pointers to documentation
so viewers can learn about what it was, did, and its place in computer
history.

I think there needs to be a repository for stuff like Eric mentioned,
with a pointer to the site from the Freedos.org home page explicitly
stating "Only free and open source software may be hosted on Ibiblio.
This URL points to a site not on Ibiblio with software that was
recommended by Freedos user as generally useful DOS sofwaret that is
free but *not* open source.  If interested you may find it *here*."

My concern is providing copies of and information *about* DOS and  DOS
software.  If the software is free to use but *not* open source, I
don't care.  It may not be posted *on* Ibiblio, but DOS/Freedos users
should be able to *find* it, with a pointer on Freedos.org to
somewhere other than Ibiblio where it might live.

> Jim
___
Dennis


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Why I use DOS a.k.a. FreeDOS for Dummies?

[Jim Hall]

> On 4/22/2021 3:21 AM, Thomas Desi wrote:
> > There are many different reasons why people would want to install FreeDOS 
> > (if they get to know it).
> > „ Different" like in „different people“. The needs and equipments are 
> > different and the mixture of technical generations
> > should not restrain FreeDOS, IMHO, to „retro computing“ and nostalgia only. 
> > Nostalgia is very much ok and brings up new and other thoughts, too. But 
> > there is 2021, too.
> > I understand that there is a difference when installing on to Harddisk and 
> > booting, or just having a USB Stick and using it on top of Linux or Windows.
> > It depends, as I say, on what people want, and - what they could want if 
> > the just knew…


On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 11:57 AM Ralf Quint  wrote:
>
> Well, here I think lays a huge problem for us (the FreeDOS project), a
> lot of people don't seem to know what they want. There are always a
> number of people showing up at random times, who come up with all kinds
> of glorious ideas or serious (in their eyes) complaints as what to add
> or change in FreeDOS. Which, when looked at it at the baseline of those
> ideas, would result in a second coming of Linux.
> These are a lot of times people that voice their grievances about how
> bad Windows/Microsoft is, even if the only practical reason is that it
> seems to be en vogue in certain circle to bash on Windows/Microsoft.
> Or there are those people that can't cope with the alleged complexity of
> Linux, thinking of (Free)DOS as being their savior, but then requiring
> all those complexities, which would result in something that is looking
> like just another Linux. Or Windows. Or macOS...
>
> It seems to be hard for some people to see that FreeDOS is indeed a lot
> more retro than cutting edge. And that some things just are not a real
> fit for FreeDOS. Like someone on the FB page recently suggesting that it
> would be great to have a Apache/MySQL/PHP stack on FreeDOS. Without
> actually thinking about or realizing that the very design of DOS makes
> such an endeavor rather unfeasible...

I get a lot of the emails you described. People email me to ask why
FreeDOS doesn't run on their Raspberry Pi like Linux does .. or why
FreeDOS can't take advantage of multiple CPUs and cores like Linux
does .. or why FreeDOS can't run on their UEFI-only system (no
"Legacy" mode) like Windows can .. or why FreeDOS doesn't have a
default GUI like Windows .. or the one you mentioned from the Facebook
group asking how to run an Apache/MySQL/PHP stack on a single FreeDOS
box.

FreeDOS has the same basic design as any other DOS, and that means
FreeDOS also has the same limitations as DOS. FreeDOS requires an
Intel CPU and a BIOS. FreeDOS is "single-user" and "single-tasking,"
and runs on just one CPU. FreeDOS is 16-bit, so it has the memory and
disk limitations of a 16-bit system.

That said, I think FreeDOS is a great implementation of DOS. We have
more tools and features than any other DOS from the 1990s era, yet
we're still "DOS." FreeDOS is very compatible with MS-DOS .. I've only
found one or two programs that don't run on FreeDOS, and usually these
are trying to poke into some MS-DOS memory location.

FreeDOS is DOS plus a bunch of cool tools. FreeDOS isn't Linux, or
Windows, or Mac. But as a DOS, FreeDOS is pretty great.


Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jim,

interesting that the DISKMAN website just WORKED.
The idea to view it using archive.org came from
Robert, maybe it did not work from his area? Odd.

> I downloaded 4.2.a3 from the author's website
> http://www.diskman.co.uk/ and while there's no Readme
> file, running the program prints this notice:
> 
>> Licensed to : ALPHA RELEASE. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE...

The list of versions (on the website, viewed through
archive.org, as written) also suggests that, but how
about the most recent stable release 4.x instead then?

If the website still is active, the software may
still be freeware for non-commercial, non-violent
use BUT shareware for the rest, which might be an
issue for fitting it into our licensing policies?

> That's a live website, so you don't need to point to the Archive.org
> copy of the website.
> 
> There's a "Contact me" form at the bottom of his website, and I have
> just submitted a request there to ask if he would be willing to
> release Diskman under an open source software license. I pointed James
> to the OpenSource Initiative's website and their list of open source
> licenses.

Thanks! Regards, Eric

PS: I had encountered it when searching ibiblio for file managers,
partition managers and system info tools. Laaca just told me that
*DOS Navigator* is quite okay as file manager AND has a reasonable
system info feature :-) That and DOSZIP commander are the two file
managers which we have in our 1.2 ibiblio collection at the moment.

PPS: Making dozens of version-subdirectories cannot have been more
work than normalizing (within-package only!) versioned zip names ;-)



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Jim Hall]

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 10:59 AM Eric Auer  wrote:
>
>
> Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"
>
> https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/disk/dm/
>
> which has only bare binaries inside. So I wondered what it is.
> Now Robert, who says I should not thank him, has found the URL
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070208031008/http://www.diskman.co.uk/about.aspx
>
> which gives a comprehensive answer to the question :-)
>
> DM means DISKMAN and is a (also scriptable) tool which can
> backup/restore LFN, quickformat FAT12/16/32, manage, read,
> write and mount disks, partitions and images of those, DOS
> and BIOS style, including a raw disk editor and some extras
> like CMOS backup/restore and a little bit of NTFS. Newest
> version would be 4.x, while we have 2.0 and 2.1 archived.
>[..]
> What are your thoughts on this? It SOUNDS useful to ME,
> so if somebody has time, they could recursively fetch a
> bunch of documentation from the website and throw it into
> an updated ZIP for ibiblio. The author hints that source
> code could be made available on request.

I'm not sure why that was on Ibiblio. We can only include open source
software on the Ibiblio site.

I downloaded Diskman and ran it on FreeDOS. One version barfed on
FreeDOS and wouldn't run (possibly because it's under QEMU?) The
version that ran printed a message that the software cannot be
distributed without written permission. That means we cannot put it on
Ibiblio.

I downloaded 4.2.a3 from the author's website
http://www.diskman.co.uk/ and while there's no Readme file, running
the program prints this notice:

>Licensed to : ALPHA RELEASE. DO NOT DISTRIBUTE
>
>This software may not be copied, distributed, modified, or incorporated within
>any product or service without the written permission of the copyright holder
>This software may be used freely for non-commercial purposes. Please visit
>www.diskman.co.uk for commercial terms. Most commercial licenses restrict
>the use of this program to a single machine/user. Unless the license states
>otherwise only one copy of this software may be used at any instance without
>the purchase of additional licenses. This software is supplied `as is' and
>the author accepts no liability for damage this program causes through either
>unexpected operation or intended misuse. This program may only be used if you
>consent to the above conditions.
>
>Visit www.diskman.co.uk for more information

So that notice is very clear, we cannot distribute Diskman. I have
pulled Diskman from Ibiblio.

>
> While there is no address mentioned on diskman.co.uk on
> archive.org, the binary contains the addresses debug@...
> and jim@... with ... being the mentioned domain, which
> makes it tricky to contact the author on his gone domain:
> "James Clark, an electronics engineer, working for a
> leading UK computer manufacturer"
>

Running Diskman on FreeDOS also prints the website URL:
http://www.diskman.co.uk/

That's a live website, so you don't need to point to the Archive.org
copy of the website.

There's a "Contact me" form at the bottom of his website, and I have
just submitted a request there to ask if he would be willing to
release Diskman under an open source software license. I pointed James
to the OpenSource Initiative's website and their list of open source
licenses.

Jim


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Diskman in our Ibiblio collection

[Eric Auer]

Hi! Recently I have noticed that our ibiblio contains "DM21"

https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/disk/dm/

which has only bare binaries inside. So I wondered what it is.
Now Robert, who says I should not thank him, has found the URL

http://web.archive.org/web/20070208031008/http://www.diskman.co.uk/about.aspx

which gives a comprehensive answer to the question :-)

DM means DISKMAN and is a (also scriptable) tool which can
backup/restore LFN, quickformat FAT12/16/32, manage, read,
write and mount disks, partitions and images of those, DOS
and BIOS style, including a raw disk editor and some extras
like CMOS backup/restore and a little bit of NTFS. Newest
version would be 4.x, while we have 2.0 and 2.1 archived.

Version 3 was the start of a clean-up with limited, but
more stable features and 4 is quite similar to 2.1 as far
as features are explained, but more clean and stable :-)

The website also features a manual, a reference guide, FAQ,
various examples and, in the news section, a list of known
issues and planned changes. Version 4 is from 2002, while
version 2 is from the year 2000.

What are your thoughts on this? It SOUNDS useful to ME,
so if somebody has time, they could recursively fetch a
bunch of documentation from the website and throw it into
an updated ZIP for ibiblio. The author hints that source
code could be made available on request.

While there is no address mentioned on diskman.co.uk on
archive.org, the binary contains the addresses debug@...
and jim@... with ... being the mentioned domain, which
makes it tricky to contact the author on his gone domain:
"James Clark, an electronics engineer, working for a
leading UK computer manufacturer"

Thanks! Regards, Eric

PS: Interesting observation: The Stallman support movement
seems to have >1/3 eastern supporters. Cultural difference?



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Forwarding and commenting a FreeDOS 1.3rc3 critical review

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Jerome:


Many people run FreeDOS on bare metal and their experience of installing the OS 
is extremely important.

However, the overwhelming vast majority of users do not do that. They install 
into one of the virtual machine platforms. Therefore, their experience should 
be prioritized.


FreeDOS 1.2 is the operating system on my Dell OptiPlex GX270 tower-PC.
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Forwarding and commenting a FreeDOS 1.3rc3 critical review

[Eric Auer]

Hi! Thanks for clarifying that the installer always asks (and
hopefully explains) before choices with big consequences :-)

>> Do not tell ME, announce it during the install ;-)

> Based on my interpretation of the design constraints
> required for the installer, that ain’t gonna happen.

Not sure which constraints make offering a README hard,
but of course you can alternatively put the README and
a document viewer in the root directory and path of the
CD or USB image and a second copy of the README into
the ZIP downloads, accessible outside the images :-)

For "Our enemies bless us by telling us our weaknesses!":

I would like to say that it is important to exchange info
about problems and weaknesses. Luckily even our FRIENDS
do that. While I have deliberately paraphrased instead
of quoted Laaca's post when starting this thread to get
more friendly moods than "1.3 is horribly disappointing"
there is no reason to assume that Laaca dislikes DOS :-)

Eric



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] What it was all about for some of us

[Alvah Whealton]

Louis,

We live in an age in which narratives and dogma, be they religious or
secular, overwhelm facts.  So I'm grateful to have you point out the truth
behind the Verda passage.

Al Whealton

On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:10 AM Louis Santillan  wrote:

> While empathize with the yearning for the simpler time in computing,
> taking it from Ted Campbell [0], the Verda Spell passage seems like it was
> intended as a humorous invocation of a muse.  Much like Homer did in the
> Iliad and Odyssey [1][2].
>
> [0] https://sourceforge.net/p/bwbasic/bugs/7/#a62d
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muses#In_literature
> [2]
> https://classical-inquiries.chs.harvard.edu/a-re-invocation-of-the-muse-for-the-homeric-iliad/
>
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:55 PM Bryan Kilgallin 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Alvah:
>>
>> > I wish I could articulate the
>> > valid things that are surrendered with the demise of computing at that
>> > level. Fortunately, people who invest time and energy into the use of
>> > FREEDOS understand what  it is that I am unable to convey.
>>
>> There's a sense of understanding, and hence control. I am not
>> forking-out on expensive licences for proprietary software. That is so
>> complex that my friends don't understand half of it!
>> --
>> members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Freedos-user mailing list
>> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>>
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Forwarding and commenting a FreeDOS 1.3rc3 critical review

[Jerome Shidel]

> On May 1, 2021, at 7:48 AM, Eric Auer  wrote:
> [..]
>  it should STILL first ask the user
> before installing DOS (pre-existing C: found) or creating
> a new partition

The installer ALWAYS asks if you want to partition when no DOS compatible 
partition can not be found.

The installer ALWAYS asks if you want to format when a DOS compatible partition 
for disk 1 (C: drive) is not readable.

The installer ALWAYS asks before installing the OS once the previous two 
conditions are satisfied.

Doing more than that and full manual control of many finer details are 
available in advanced mode.

> [..]
>>> Also the thing that CTRL+C can either open menu or kick you out?
> 
>> Like I said, only do it when it is waiting for user input.
> 
> Do not tell ME, announce it during the install ;-)

Based on my interpretation of the design constraints required for the 
installer, that ain’t gonna happen.

> [..]

Jerome___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Forwarding and commenting a FreeDOS 1.3rc3 critical review

[ZB]

On Sat, May 01, 2021 at 10:57:09PM +1000, Bryan Kilgallin wrote:

> Our enemies bless us by telling us our weaknesses!

It's not about supposed "weakness" of (Free)DOS; it's about weakness of that
"tester", who doesn't want to "waste" time learning. He doesn't want DOS; he
wants "kind of other Windows" rather, to "point and click".

Following him one could say that any OS (or any installer) not featuring
"user-friendly" GUI is trash and garbage. Maybe from his personal point of
view indeed it is -- because he's not willing (or simply unable) to learn
how to take advantage of command line.

DOS surely has some weaker points -- but surely you can't include into that
set command line use. It's feature, not bug/weakness. It's "just the way it
is". If he dosn't like it -- he can try for example Kolibri, it's
GUI-oriented from the very start. Allow DOS to stay DOS!
-- 
regards,
Zbigniew


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Forwarding and commenting a FreeDOS 1.3rc3 critical review

[Bryan Kilgallin]

G'day Eric:


However, I have only quoted part of
the post and not mentioned the name because my impression
was that just publicly shouting how horrible and disgusting
FreeDOS is cannot be the start of a productive discussion:


Our enemies bless us by telling us our weaknesses!
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Forwarding and commenting a FreeDOS 1.3rc3 critical review

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jerome, others,

of course suggestions are just suggestions and depend on
whether you have time to work on them and what others
think :-) Some feedback to you replies...

Given the point "slow boot, slow install, too few apps",
I still think Lite should not be too lite and Live should
have significantly more (pre-extracted) packages ready.

I think games which come on CD often are INSTALL FROM CD,
not RUN FROM CD, so being able to remove the Live CD to
run apps from CD still seems not that important for me.

Also, I think even when the installer THINKS that an easy
target drive exists, it should STILL first ask the user
before installing DOS (pre-existing C: found) or creating
a new partition table from scratch (apparent empty disk).

The "no drive writable for DOS" situation is likely to be
common in "only Linux or NTFS partitions exist yet" context
and the BEST recommendation in that case would be to ask
the user to *abort installation, use their pre-existing*
*Linux or Windows to resize their OS and add some LBA FAT*
partition and then start the installer again :-) Of course
it is fine to let the user decide to throw other OS away,
but I would display a very clear warning about that first.

>> Are tricks like those announced and well-visible during install?

> I’ve mentioned it numerous times here and in other venues.

It would be important to have such crucial information self-
contained inside the CD / USB image, in a readme which will
be included in the ZIP but outside the image and advertise
it automatically during the install process, I think.

Doing something which may or may not be what the user
wants, without documenting what is going on, is not
what I would advertise as "quick, easy, uncluttered".

> It is officially mentioned in only one place... run
> “setup /?” or (/h or /help or several other variants)

That is a start ;-)

>> Also the thing that CTRL+C can either open menu or kick you out?

> Like I said, only do it when it is waiting for user input.

Do not tell ME, announce it during the install ;-)

>> Unless you make a temp file in a small RAMDISK which you should
>> have anyway because pipelines in DOS actually are temp files ;-)
> 
> And how would that help logging the partitioning process???
> 
> Reboot, bye bye log.

Display the log, waiting for confirmation, before reboot:
Better than only doing things behind the screen or letting
each step scroll away while it happens. The user still gets
a good summary bundled at one moment of the first half of
the install process. Second half can log to target drive.

> I have plans for things of this sort and many other improvements.
> But all take some amount of time. Only so much of that available.

Luckily WHATIS and APROPOS are pre-existing DOS tools :-)

Regards, Eric



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Forwarding and commenting a FreeDOS 1.3rc3 critical review

[Jerome Shidel]

> On Apr 30, 2021, at 12:36 PM, Eric Auer  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Jerome, Laaca, others,
> 
> Given that I have verbose thoughts about Laaca's review and your
> […]
> versions. Lite ONLY exists for USB and I think it is TOO small.

Wether or not any of those ideas are good or bad, they all take some amount of 
time to research and/or implement. Some a few minutes, some hours and others 
longer. There is only so much time available. Time better spent improving 
things most users will appreciate. Things like adjusting installation paths and 
updating packages are more important to most people. And even replying to this 
email takes time.

> […]
> The Live version only exists for CD, why not for USB? And why
> do Live and Full (USB) or Legacy (CD) have to be separate
> downloads? Also, why not call it "Full CD", like "Full USB”?

As I said before, the Live Environment is a Live OS. It can have things 
installed into it without any need to write to or existence of a hard drive. 
What packages actually are pre-extracted or made live are always up for 
adjustment. Those choices are only made based on user convenience. It wastes 
most users time extracting (and disc space) pre-extracting and/or making 
“active” packages users will rarely use.

> 
> The purpose of a Live CD is that you can ENJOY APPS without
> having to install the operating system in question. If you
> only include BASE apps, you should call it "boot disk" ;-)

Like I said, it is a Live OS. Even if it was just base, it is far more than a 
boot disk. For all intents and purposes, there is only one difference between 
running the Live Environment and running an Installed to Hard Disk version. 
That difference is — Turn off or reboot and changes to the Live OS are reset. 
Now if you decide to make changes to your hard drive from the Live OS, that is 
your choice and those would persist across reboots. Otherwise, things like disk 
repair utilities would be of no use in the Live Environment.

>> Perhaps more software will be pre-extracted on the CD and
>> not made “active” on a RAM disk in 1.3-FINAL. However, this
>> has some trade-offs. You really can’t remove the CD...
> 
> It is still better to have (more) pre-extracted apps :-)

Completely disagree. Being able to remove the CD is a very good feature. You 
can boot the LiveCD. Yank the disc out. Put in a game or program disc that can 
run directly from CD and use it. Without being able to remove the disc, to run 
such programs would more or less require you to install the OS to the hard 
drive.

>> Some programs cannot be run on a read-only filesystem.
> 
> Which? Probably only a few apps would complain about that.

As I said, it would require testing each of them to ensure they did not have 
issues. More time and effort.

I have no idea what (if any) programs/packages provided with the FreeDOS 
release might require a writeable hard drive.
I do know I have seen many such programs in the past during my DOS days. 

>> Regardless, RC4 does a much better job than RC3 to auto partition
>> blank hard disks. On a clean system or VM, most users will no
>> longer even see FDISK.
> 
> To ME that sounds like "it will auto destroy ALL your data
> when it accidentally mis-detects the disk as being empty,
> without even asking you first!" :-o Please clarify.

As I said… On a CLEAN system it will usually be able to auto partition. 

If there is a drive writeable to DOS, neither partition or formatting occur and 
the installer goes straight to “install now”. On rare occasions, that in itself 
may not be what a user wants. The may have Windows 95 installed and want a new 
partition for FreeDOS. 

If there is no drive writable to DOS, the user is prompted by the installer 
wether or not you want it to partition the drive.

If running in advanced mode or detection cannot be performed or any partitions 
exist, auto partition does not occur and the user is thrown into FDISK.

If any user thinks their is any risk in letting DOS partition their drive, they 
should use other means to do so. 

> 
>> The easiest way to run in advanced mode is to exit the
>> installer and run “setup adv”. But, ... CTRL+C ...
> 
> Are tricks like those announced and well-visible during install?

I’ve mentioned it numerous times here and in other venues. 

Design implementation for a quick, easy and uncluttered install prevents such 
things during execution.

It is officially mentioned in only one place… run “setup /?” or (/h or /help or 
several other variants)

> Also the thing that CTRL+C can either open menu or kick you out?

Like I said, only do it when it is waiting for user input. Most people are used 
to such odd instructions from video game easter eggs, cheats and power moves. 
Things like “at the blah blah screen, press up up up left X down L2+R2 to 
enable god mode"

It could keep CTRL+C from throwing you out at other times. But, it is an power 
user feature. Most should just run “setup adv”.  

>> [..] There really is no way to 

Re: [Freedos-user] What it was all about for some of us

[Louis Santillan]

While empathize with the yearning for the simpler time in computing, taking
it from Ted Campbell [0], the Verda Spell passage seems like it was
intended as a humorous invocation of a muse.  Much like Homer did in the
Iliad and Odyssey [1][2].

[0] https://sourceforge.net/p/bwbasic/bugs/7/#a62d
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muses#In_literature
[2]
https://classical-inquiries.chs.harvard.edu/a-re-invocation-of-the-muse-for-the-homeric-iliad/

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:55 PM Bryan Kilgallin 
wrote:

> Thanks, Alvah:
>
> > I wish I could articulate the
> > valid things that are surrendered with the demise of computing at that
> > level. Fortunately, people who invest time and energy into the use of
> > FREEDOS understand what  it is that I am unable to convey.
>
> There's a sense of understanding, and hence control. I am not
> forking-out on expensive licences for proprietary software. That is so
> complex that my friends don't understand half of it!
> --
> members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/
>
>
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] What it was all about for some of us

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Thanks, Alvah:

I wish I could articulate the 
valid things that are surrendered with the demise of computing at that 
level. Fortunately, people who invest time and energy into the use of 
FREEDOS understand what  it is that I am unable to convey.


There's a sense of understanding, and hence control. I am not 
forking-out on expensive licences for proprietary software. That is so 
complex that my friends don't understand half of it!

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] New FreeDOSers Monthly Reminder

[John Price]

--

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, religion, culture,
   sexual orientation, gender or identity will not be tolerated.

   Don't swear. We don't want this mailing list to become what Usenet
   turned into.

2. NO PROMOTIONS OR SPAM

   Remember, this group is about FreeDOS. General DOS topics are okay,
   but try to keep it related to FreeDOS. Self-promotion, spam and
   irrelevant links aren't allowed. Spammers will be banned.

   Keep posts on-topic. We set up this mailing list to discuss FreeDOS
   issues.

3. BE KIND AND COURTEOUS

   We're all in this together to create a welcoming environment. Let's
   treat everyone with respect. Healthy debates are natural, but
   kindness is required.

   No flame wars. If you feel really strongly against what someone has
   said, send a reply off-list.

--

  
  

/* This is an automated message sent out to the mailing list at the
first of each month.  It is automagically downloaded from 
http://freedos.sourceforge.net/freedos/lists/remind.txt 

Feel free to contact John Price if necessary by replying to this
message. */



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user