Greetings,
quite some time ago, I re-ported the SVGATextmode utility to DOS. With
it, you can set up all kinds of textmodes, as it acesses SVGA-cards
pretty low-level. I use 100x75 on my old laptop for more than two years
now :) Binaries and sources can be found here:
Pat,
Interestingly enough, a lot of responses seem not care about new
development.
That's not true.
There's a big difference between 'no new API' and 'no new
developement'
In fact one of the biggest improvement to DOS - which is useful to ANY
user - is completely new (if you count 2003 as
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:45:33 -0400, you wrote:
Hi Pat,
Interestingly enough, a lot of responses seem not care about new
development. Some even go as far as saying that whatever we have for
dos extenders, memory managers, etc., is good enough. Does this mean
I don't think so.
I can only say
Hi Johnson,
IMO, a smaller, solid and flexable kernel is highest priority.
Our kernel is only ca 40 kilobytes on disk, which is quite small.
Kernel grows bigger each release, but the compatibility with MS-DOS
still not finished, the syntax in CONFIG SYS still have a big diff
Agreed, the
Our kernel is only ca 40 kilobytes on disk, which is quite small.
Kernel grows bigger each release, but the compatibility with MS-DOS
still not finished, the syntax in CONFIG SYS still have a big diff
Agreed, the config sys syntax differs considerably.
yes. And unless someone sits down and
No LSM needed right now, as this is not included in the default FreeDOS distro.
I went ahead and mirrored this on ibiblio -
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/user/
Thanks!
-jh
On 10/25/07, Wolfram Sang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings,
quite some time ago, I
I think a lot of the stuff I'd like to see featured in the next-gen
FreeDOS exist mostly in userspace. UNIX-y commands (updated GNUish,
for example), a nice GUI, etc. I want DOS to be usable by everyone
(Linux Mac users, etc, not just DOS geeks.)
I'd be very interested in seeing multitasking or
On 10/26/07, Johnson Lam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO, a smaller, solid and flexable kernel is highest priority.
stability is most important of course.
Kernel grows bigger each release
??? Where have you been? Any numbers to back it up? Or were you
looking at the sizes of the source .zips,
On 10/25/07, Pat Villani [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interestingly enough, a lot of responses seem not care about new
development. Some even go as far as saying that whatever we have for
dos extenders, memory managers, etc., is good enough. Does this mean
that there is no new development
