On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 22:01:32 +0100, you wrote:
>I don't really understand the interest in this. Why would anyone want to
>"install" it? I mean we all have CD-ROM and bootable memory sticks these
>days. Why not just release a bunch of files and let people write their
>own installers. It's a ten minute job. The convoluted SYSLINUX installer
Because today's user get used to INSTALL programs.
> > Other concerns are 8086
>> compatibility and FAT32 support, as well as being able to compile
>> FreeDOS components with opensource (or at least freely available)
8086 with FAT32 simultaneous is not practical. Maybe someone still own
a 8086 PC but please consider support from 80386, because today's DOS
program or XMS is for 80386.
>For me, the bigger issue would be native NTFS, UDF and NFS support,
>although I understand these are not really "DOS" as such. I mean how
>many FAT32 drives do you see these days? Not many, although I guess USB
>removables are causing a major FAT comeback!
Sysinternal have NTFSDOS, though no LFN.
NFS is exactly on of the "killer application" for FreeDOS, but it's a
big project, must start a team to work on it, but seems no one is
willing to take the job
>One thing that crosses my mind a lot is "Should I be using Linux for
>boot environments instead of FreeDOS?". I don't know the answer, but I
>imagine Linux will cope with very modern hardware such as x64 and
>protected execution, serial SCSI, USB and so on, but right now FreeDOS
>does everything I need.
A single disk Linux boot like FreeDOS, also need someone code drivers
for the modern hardware. FreeDOS already can take some of the DOS
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.
Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course
Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005
Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information
Freedos-user mailing list