Alain schreef:
I agree with this, and if simplicity in the number of versions
available is an issue, have 386+ and 8088 versions (being 286+
optimized is ok whenever possible, and whenever the differences
between the 286-optimized and 386-optimized versions are small.
Furthermore, this is something already done, I assume, but such
versions should clearly say "386+ optimised version" or "8088 version"
clearly in the /?, or this may become a nightmare of versions when a
user reports bugs.
Aitor
when running FreeCOM, it already identifies itself:
FreeCom version 0.84-pre XMS_Swap [Jul 21 2005 15:18:15]
and VER /R can report the kernel and/or DOS version also in a limited way.
right now we have a full-featured FreeCOM for 186+, with support for
swapping a large part of its memory footprint to XMS if HIMEM is loaded.
only thing missing is support for CALL /S (which swaps out the shell to
disk before running a program which requires a lot of RAM).
we also have a 8086+ compatible version that also supports swapping to
XMS, but to compile successfully features like LH (LOADHIGH) and ALIAS
weren't not only accepted, but also compiled out.
This means LH MOUSE won't work, as 'LH' is now an unknown command.
This one also does not support CALL /S
What's missing is a 8086+ version with CALL /S support. Don't know if it
can support all features then (except XMSswap).
so we have:
*platform
*CALL /S
*XMSswap
*features like LH and ALIAS, and LOADFIX and COMMAND /Z (generates
visible errorlevels on exit of programs)
Bernd
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
