[Freedos-devel] A Idea of Text User Interface for FreeDOS.

Hello, I have an idea. This idea is rewritting FreeDOS FDSHELL program through FDOSTUI (http://www.nongnu.org/fdostui/). I want to start rewritting FDSHELL program in next months. If this program is being rewritten by someone, I won't start rewritting this program. Best regards, Ercan

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ???

If you are speaking of a 'standard' set of libraries,windows applications use something similiar.Windows has a set of "Forms" and "Controls",which ALL apps use (hence,making them windows applications).Windows itself places a border,with different buttons on each application.The application can

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ???

Hi Tom, I used a different spreadsheet so far and that worked: http://nab.pcug.org.au/ For my 64 bit Nanolinux distro I tried to add Teapot but did not get that to compile with FLTK 1.3.2. Teapot is written for FLTK 1.0.x and somehow will not work with 1.3.2. I spent quite some time but did

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ??? - BGI

BGI never existed on Turbo Basic, at least officially. Not sure about Turbo Prolog nevertheless. 2016-02-20 2:53 GMT+01:00 Ralf Quint : > On 2/19/2016 5:48 PM, Jose Antonio Senna wrote: > > I read (quickly) the Wikipedia article on BGI and > > the page at

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea??

> I just want to mention that I ported the GUI library FLTK to DOS. FLTK > competes with GTK and has more features than anybody could write from > scratch within years. > Based on the FLTK library I wrote the XFDOS Desktop for FreeDOS. > Anybody is most welcome to use FLTK for DOS to implement

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ???

I just want to mention that I ported the GUI library FLTK to DOS. FLTK competes with GTK and has more features than anybody could write from scratch within years. Based on the FLTK library I wrote the XFDOS Desktop for FreeDOS. Anybody is most welcome to use FLTK for DOS to implement GUI based

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ???

On Sat, 20 Feb 2016, Eric Auer wrote: > > Hi Jose, > > to shorten that thread a bit, I would like to let you know that as > far as I understood Maarten in off-list chats, he only ponders the > creation of a graphical file manager, not of a GUI based desktop > shell or even graphical operating

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ??? - BGI

On 2/19/2016 5:48 PM, Jose Antonio Senna wrote: > I read (quickly) the Wikipedia article on BGI and > the page at openBGI.sourceforge.net and it seems > to be just another C library to be linked with apps, > not a resident resource. > BGI is a library that allows to load drivers for various

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ???

Consider improving TriDOS. Maybe replace the built-in DPMI engine by a more mainstream, more comprehensive implementation, as well? http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/system tridos.zip 22k tridos_s.zip 371k source tridos.txt 3k direct link:

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

<mailto:freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> *Onderwerp: *Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea??? This was my intent for many years. Eventually I shelved the project because it a shell simply can't do all I wanted it to; I needed to go more low-level for that. At its heart, DOS (MS-, IBM-, Free

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ???

On 2/19/2016 6:06 PM, Jose Antonio Senna wrote: ... Or you could do something like DesqView, as was discussed in this list sometime ago. In short, use the timer interrupt to swap between processes, swapping all their environment at the same time. To give an idea of the amount of work

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea ???

Hi Jose, to shorten that thread a bit, I would like to let you know that as far as I understood Maarten in off-list chats, he only ponders the creation of a graphical file manager, not of a GUI based desktop shell or even graphical operating system :-) Which leads to the question: Which COOL

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

: [Freedos-devel] An idea??? This was my intent for many years. Eventually I shelved the project because it a shell simply can't do all I wanted it to; I needed to go more low-level for that. At its heart, DOS (MS-, IBM-, Free- or otherwise) is a single tasking OS. What this means is that yo

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

This was my intent for many years. Eventually I shelved the project because it a shell simply can't do all I wanted it to; I needed to go more low-level for that. At its heart, DOS (MS-, IBM-, Free- or otherwise) is a single tasking OS. What this means is that you /can/ make a shell program to

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

s why!" Some Nice projects: - Freedos - Night DOS Kernel Quote from email: -- Van: Louis Santillan Verzonden: donderdag 18 februari 2016 17:54 Aan: Technical discussion and questions for FreeDOS developers. Onderwerp: Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea??? Forgot to mention NewDeal [0] and some oth

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

Forgot to mention NewDeal [0] and some other pre-Y2K GUIs [1]. [0] http://toastytech.com/guis/nd32.html [1] http://toastytech.com/guis/index.html On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Louis Santillan wrote: > Maarten, > > You should familiarize yourself with what's already been

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

Hi, Interesting what you all think of it. :) I didn’t research, I first wanted to see what you all think of the idea. And actually it’s a bit of a mixed. But definitely some good reactions where there. OpenGEM is maybe an option, I will look for that. I will also do some research. So what I

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

Maarten, You should familiarize yourself with what's already been done. OPENGEM/GEM [0], SEAL[1], DOSStart [2], others [3][4][5]. [0] http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=opengem [1] http://sealsystem.sourceforge.net/ [2]

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

Rather than create your own new GUI from scratch, might I convince you to improve & modernize an existing DOS GUI such as those listed here: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/gui/ SEAL or OpenGEM might be interesting starting points.

Re: [Freedos-devel] An idea???

On 2/17/2016 12:19 PM, Maarten Vermeulen wrote: Hi all, It’s not really about FreeDOS… but it has something to do with it. :) I thought that maybe if you all like the idea, I could make a GUI shell. It would be exclusive of course. Though, It will be especially for FreeDOS. And maybe also

[Freedos-devel] An idea???

Hi all, It’s not really about FreeDOS… but it has something to do with it. :) I thought that maybe if you all like the idea, I could make a GUI shell. It would be exclusive of course. Though, It will be especially for FreeDOS. And maybe also MS-DOS and Night DOS. It’s a sort of a vote. Would

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:09:50 -0500, you wrote: Hi Michael, DEVICE=EMM386.EXE RAM EMM=1024 No, you have to add SB for the SoundBlaster workaround to be active. Anything up to EMM=2030 or in that neighborhood should work too, if you want more EMS. Please advise your 'working' command line, so

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

At 02:05 PM 8/26/2004 +0800, Johnson Lam wrote: On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:09:50 -0500, you wrote: Hi Michael, DEVICE=EMM386.EXE RAM EMM=1024 No, you have to add SB for the SoundBlaster workaround to be active. Anything up to EMM=2030 or in that neighborhood should work too, if you want more EMS.

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:41:43 -0500, you wrote: Hi Michael, SoundBlaster requires that you use an EMM= setting in EMM386 of somewhere less than mid-2000 since it needs to load in the first 4M of high memory already shared with other things. I've tried lower setting such as 1024, but no

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:04:18 -0500, you wrote: Hi Michael, Verification needs to be either by my testing here or via a reasonably detailed explanation by a reliable source as to why the feature is desired or necessary. Alternatively, if you have incontrovertible proof that a new EMM386

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

At 03:34 PM 8/24/2004 +0800, Johnson Lam wrote: Verification needs to be either by my testing here or via a reasonably detailed explanation by a reliable source as to why the feature is desired or necessary. Alternatively, if you have incontrovertible proof that a new EMM386 option is vital to

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

At 02:10 PM 8/24/2004 -0300, Alain wrote: But, (is there always one?) does the RAM option fall within a compatibility problem? I use it as default for one reason: I install it on any client machine and I don't expect it to do any optimization, but to provide _some_ UMB which ususaly makes a

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

At 10:31 PM 8/24/2004 +0800, Johnson Lam wrote: Sorry for my stupidity, I really have no idea what's happen in SB Emulation. Last test is a failure. It always report cannot load something into memory (I'll clean up the mess and post again). SoundBlaster requires that you use an EMM= setting in

[Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

Hi, I had some problems with receiving mail, but reading the online list archives gives me the idea that there is a misunderstanding here... - Tyler found a small tool, and the readme of that tool states that it is important for him (the author of the tool) to keep the tool 0.5k size. - I

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Idea about Virtual PC compatibility / A20 handling

At 08:02 PM 8/23/2004 +0200, Eric Auer wrote: Conclusion: I wrote to the list, suggesting that this might be an A20 related problem, and suggesting to re-add Tom's invention, the refuse to actually disable A20, to HIMEM (or EMM386: at least MS EMM386 locks the real A20 to on and uses the paged

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re:Eric's idea to put PG binaries online

HI, I have a BIG question: What is PG? I just searched the site, followed every link and could not find any explanation, it only says how it can solve many PC problems, not even specifying which... If so many people in FreeDOS are interested, I would like to know about ;-) Alain

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re:Eric's idea to put PG binaries online

At Mon, 16 Feb 2004 4:08pm -0200, Alain wrote: HI, I have a BIG question: What is PG? I just searched the site, followed every link and could not find any explanation, it only says how it can solve many PC problems, not even specifying which... If so many people in FreeDOS are

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re:Eric's idea to put PG binaries online

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 16:08:17 -0200, you wrote: Hi Alain, Link below: http://www.geocities.com/freedos_pg If so many people in FreeDOS are interested, I would like to know about ;-) The problem is PG 1.08 didn't come with binary. At first I think PG's maintainer BAHCL forgot to put the binary

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re:Eric's idea to put PG binaries online

Hello maintainer, PS: I would like to have some PG binaries online, too. If nobody else wants to provide some, I could do so, but I am not sure if BAHCL is okay with this!? mf those PG binaries will be covered by the GNU GPL mf version 2, and will have a link to the PG website. there's

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re:Eric's idea to put PG binaries online

Luchezar Georgiev wrote: Hi, This written offer requirement is really scaring indeed. Does the GPL say that it must be signed and stamped by a notary? Or passed through the United Nations Security Council? ;-) Just joking, of course - please don't take the above sentences seriously! :-) BTW,