For purposes we're discussing here, I don't think DOSBox (or any of its forks, including vDOS) is a viable solution.
DOSBox really isn't DOS. It's an environment designed to run certain DOS applications. A lot of stuff is missing in DOSBox that's needed to make it a "real enough" DOS to be used for development and testing. E.g., a lot of the internal structures that some DOS "extenders" need to look at (like certain TSRs and Device Drivers) simply don't exist on DOSBox. A perfect example of this are the "standard" DOS Devices: NUL, CON, COM1-COM4, AUX, LPT1-LPT3, PRN, and CLOCK$. In DOSBox, the only two that exist in a form where other programs can "see" them using standard methods (by scanning through the linked list of Device Driver addresses) are NUL and CON. Things like that can cause lots of problems in certain situations. _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
