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 FreeDOS reach a certain level of compatibility of MS-DOS, and it still can have a lot of improvement. >that there is no new development expected from the majority of FreeDOS >developers? IMO, a smaller, solid and flexable kernel is highest priority. Kernel grows bigger each release, but the compatibility with MS-DOS still not finished, the syntax in CONFIG.SYS still have a big difference. Fastest way to change even need no coding: to clear up the naming scheme and version of the FreeDOS, drop the confusing "2036test" or "082pl3" and back to simpler one. After the new scheme deployed, that will have a certain impact to the boring scene, and let the DOS developers that FreeDOS still active. Something like this will be even better: http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/status.php?show_status=1&begaming_website_session=afded9279c6b3e3b5b5b863917bc122d Rgds, Johnson. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
