Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi, On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Joe Forster/STA wrote: > >> How about some of our md5 and sha... sum implementations? > > I'm working on pdsum, something that started as an expansion of pdSFV > but I completely rewrote it since. It compiles with Borland C++ 3.1 to 37 >

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi, On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 1:56 AM, Eric Auer wrote: > > think should be moved to "Base" in "FreeDOS 2.0"? > >> * chksum (6 kb) > > How about some of our md5 and sha... sum implementations? IIRC, Blair's md5sum.exe is 30 kb (UPX'd) while C. Dye's chksum is roughly 6 kb.

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

> On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 21:23:43 +0200, Tom Ehlert wrote: >> one last thought: how exactly would make your proposed changes >> FreeDOS worth a change in naming to 2.0 ? >> >> I personally would expect more change then removing APPEND even if >> APPEND has its roots in CP/M and MSDOS 1.0 On Fri, Oct

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

> > (1) What does "Base" mean in 2017 or 2018? I think there are some > > packages we might take out of "Base" and move into a "Compat" package > > group, such as: > > > APPEND > > ASSIGN > > GRAPHICS > > JOIN > > SUBST > > others? On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Tom Ehlert

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 21:23:43 +0200, Tom Ehlert wrote: > I personally would expect more change then removing APPEND even if > APPEND has its roots in CP/M and MSDOS 1.0 I have to agree with Tom here. I really don't see the point of such move. We are talking about a legacy system that has no

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hallo Herr Jim Hall, > (1) What does "Base" mean in 2017 or 2018? I think there are some > packages we might take out of "Base" and move into a "Compat" package > group, such as: > APPEND > ASSIGN > GRAPHICS > JOIN > SUBST > others? leaving them where they are doesn´t hurt; what would be the

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

> Okay, but I have to ask ... do you use MS-DOS SUBST or (also) FreeDOS? I use > both depending on the exact circumstances, but generally prefer FreeDOS > SWSUBST. A lot of MS-DOS utilities have the version issue where they worn't > work across different DOS versions whereas the after-market

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi guys, How about some of our md5 and sha... sum implementations? I'm working on pdsum, something that started as an expansion of pdSFV (http://rescene.wikidot.com/pdsfv ) but I completely rewrote it since. It compiles with Borland C++ 3.1 to 37 kbytes (without UPX) but it supports

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Thomas Mueller wrote: from Steve Nickolas: QEMU? MAME? I use 360K floppy disk images all the time in emulators. Does the floppy size in an emulator have to match an existing physical floppy disk? It may depend on how strict the emulation is. MAME's is very strict.

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Maybe you could implement Morse code instead of tcp On Oct 18, 2017 2:09 AM, "Jim Hall" wrote: > Hi all > > I don't know if you saw on our Twitter or on Facebook, but since its > release on December 25 2016, FreeDOS 1.2 passed 500,000 downloads in > June 2017. And passed

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi Rugxulo, think should be moved to "Base" in "FreeDOS 2.0"? ... > * chksum (6 kb) How about some of our md5 and sha... sum implementations? > * arclds (6 kb) Is that like "file" but only for zip and other archives? In that case my tiny 2 kB "filetype" tool seems better ;-) >

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

from Steve Nickolas: > On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Rugxulo wrote: > > How?? I'm not even aware of any emulators that support such size. > > (Maybe they do, I haven't checked much.) Even 720 kb might be barely > > useful, but I don't know how to make/modify it (without physical > > hardware). >

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Rugxulo wrote: How?? I'm not even aware of any emulators that support such size. (Maybe they do, I haven't checked much.) Even 720 kb might be barely useful, but I don't know how to make/modify it (without physical hardware). QEMU? MAME? I use 360K floppy disk images

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi again, On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Jim Hall wrote: >> On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > >>> (2) Are there other packages we should install "Base" by default? I >>> don't want to make this a free-for-all, but perhaps there are some >>> utilities that should be

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi, On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:58 PM, Jim Hall wrote: > > I posted this topic to the FreeDOS Facebook group, as well. Sharing > some comments from our Facebook friends, to add to the discussion: > (edited for clarity/brevity) > > - a floppy maintainance kit > [I think this

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi, On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:25 AM, Kenway, Owain wrote: > > From: Jim Hall > Sent: 17 October 2017 16:44 > >> I've lately wondered what should come after FreeDOS 1.2. I think it's >> time to talk about "FreeDOS 2.0." > >> (4) Is there anything missing in

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi, On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Bret Johnson wrote: > > > On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > >> (1) What does "Base" mean in 2017 or 2018? I think there are some > >> packages we might take out of "Base" and move into a "Compat" package > >> group, such as: > >> >

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

> On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: [..] >> (1) What does "Base" mean in 2017 or 2018? I think there are some >> packages we might take out of "Base" and move into a "Compat" package >> group, such as: >> >> APPEND >> ASSIGN >> GRAPHICS >> JOIN >> SUBST >> others? > I'll admit that I'm the

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

>> On Oct 17, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: [..] >> I've lately wondered what should come after FreeDOS 1.2. I think it's >> time to talk about "FreeDOS 2.0." I wanted to start a conversation >> thread for it. [..] >> (4) Is there anything missing in FreeDOS 1.2 that

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

I posted this topic to the FreeDOS Facebook group, as well. Sharing some comments from our Facebook friends, to add to the discussion: (edited for clarity/brevity) - a floppy maintainance kit [I think this means a set of disk repair utilities?] - Internet tools (ftp, web browser, email, etc) -

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

> On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: [..] >> (1) What does "Base" mean in 2017 or 2018? I think there are some >> packages we might take out of "Base" and move into a "Compat" package >> group, such as: >> >> APPEND >> ASSIGN >> GRAPHICS >> JOIN >> SUBST >> others? >> >> (2) Are there other

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

(sorry if the formatting is messed up, OWA is a horror) From: Jim Hall <jh...@freedos.org> Sent: 17 October 2017 16:44 To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0? > Hi all > I don't know if you saw on

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

> On Oct 17, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > > Hi all > > I don't know if you saw on our Twitter or on Facebook, but since its > release on December 25 2016, FreeDOS 1.2 passed 500,000 downloads in > June 2017. And passed 600,000 in August. As of this week, FreeDOS 1.2

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

> On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Eric Auer wrote: >[..] >> In general, I would include a variety of drivers for modern >> hardware. As mentioned on BTTR, somebody recently tried a >> few DOS games on VERY new hardware: First with MS DOS plus >> Win9x FDISK (fails to boot from harddisk, so he installed >> to

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Eric Auer wrote: In general, I would include a variety of drivers for modern hardware. As mentioned on BTTR, somebody recently tried a few DOS games on VERY new hardware: First with MS DOS plus Win9x FDISK (fails to boot from harddisk, so he installed to harddisk and used a

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Ralf Quint wrote: On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: However, in looking at what "FreeDOS 2.0" might be, I think we are maintaining some legacy softare that doesn't need to be part of "base" anymore. So in looking at "FreeDOS 2.0," I am thinking about changing what

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi Jim, glad to hear that FreeDOS is so often downloaded :-) Regarding compatibility, I think about EMS / XMS drivers and how crashes with their default config might make first time users give up attempts to try "FreeDOS for fun" and return to DOSBOX for gaming... I also think about how an

Re: [Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

On 10/17/2017 8:44 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > My thoughts: > > > FreeDOS is meant to be an open source software replacement for MS-DOS. > As such, "FreeDOS 2.0" must maintain compatibility with MS-DOS. I am > not suggesting changing core compatibility. "FreeDOS 2.0" needs to > remain 16-bit, with a

[Freedos-devel] What is FreeDOS 2.0?

Hi all I don't know if you saw on our Twitter or on Facebook, but since its release on December 25 2016, FreeDOS 1.2 passed 500,000 downloads in June 2017. And passed 600,000 in August. As of this week, FreeDOS 1.2 has been downloaded over 671,500 times. I've lately wondered what should come