Hi, On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 2:03 AM, dos386 <dos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In short, I don't think EXE2BIN belongs in "BASE" for FreeDOS. > > So do I. > >> I don't know of anybody using it > > I don't use it and have no clue for what it is supposed to be useful.
In old days, "MASM, LINK, EXE2BIN" was the norm. These days, any linker worth its salt can already do that. Like I said, LINK supposed came with MS-DOS until 4.x, for some reason. No idea why anybody else (DR-DOS, etc.) would include EXE2BIN without at least LINK. And I just double-checked, the kernel uses EXEFLAT, not EXE2BIN, so I have no idea. (I was halfway wondering if maybe now or at one time they used it, but guess not. At least the copyright to EXEFLAT is from > 10 years ago and still mentions DOS-C.) > Other things to remove from BASE: > > - KERNELS < 2040 > - WDE < 0.30 > - UPX UPX is too useful, IMHO, though I know some shun it (which seems weird). And I don't think WDE is included in there (yet). At least a quick search couldn't find it in "BASE" or "UTIL". > Things to add: > > - KERNEL 2040 > - WDE 0.30 > - some useful archivers (UNTGZKIR, 7-ZIP) > - some useful and small compilers (FASM ? NASM8086 ?) WDE might be too low-level for most users. I dunno, I vaguely thought it was already in "UTIL" (or somewhere), but guess not. Still a cool tool, but not hugely crucial, I guess. Some archivers are already in "UTIL". But yeah, perhaps at least UNZIP should be in "BASE". Dunno, Jim doesn't want any disruptive changes in 1.1, maybe FD 2.0. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
