Thanks Tom Ehlert, to confirm my feeling that most DOS packages have not been
rebuilt from source code.
We used to trust people because we knew no better way in the past.
Well, I was not expecting in any way that the DOS kernel would in any way
verify binaries.
And I am/was finally aware that PGP is not ported to DOS.
Still, I believe that allowing people on Linux or Windows to test if they want,
the origin of their DOS package would be an improvement.
And I sure do not expect many people to test it.
PGP detached signatures seems fine because it does not touch the binaries (or
the text header file).
I realized that the authors of "source packages", and "binaries packages" would
need a non-DOS OS to sign their package if they care to.
Indeed I believe most DOS programs to compile relatively fast.
I still think of trying to take a few packages from core DOS and try to adapt
them to my way of doing things.
Frankly, I look at the source code of a few, and realized that their code is
very hard for me to understand.
Using a lot of assembler code (which I know a bit, but not enough to make it in
any way easy to understand).
That said, I probably don't need to really understand it to change the
structure of it (files organization) a bit.
I now realized it is in no way an high priority for this community, so I will
keep it a low-priority project for me
Release of DOS 1.3 should not wait for my ideas to take form.
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
