>>> Hope you don't mind me to ask, why didn't you rather contribute to >>> FreeDOS?
First, I do sometimes contribute to FreeDOS (i.e. DEVLOAD) and sometimes even to the thing called "FreeDOS kernel" (or DOS-C), which is to be distinguished from FreeDOS as a project. However I choosed not to become a developer of DOS-C (FreeDOS kernel) because it's design is to be written in C where possible which I think is a bad decision (Japheth probably agrees here). Besides, I'm too egoistic to write or re-write major parts of something when this new version isn't accepted because it isn't tested enough. That was the case with the "unstable" DOS-C version 2037 (which had many features version 2036 and the upcoming 2038 don't have). >> But he DOES contribute to FreeDOS: > > Who is "he"?? Me. >> once the few remaining bugs are fixed in >> the RxDOS kernel, it will replace the inferior current FD kernel. That's a nice point of view but you'll have to wait until it's done. To speak about "few remaining bugs" doesn't match the reality. Another caveat is that "once" might have to wait another few months or year. > I tested a lot RxDOS and was very frustrated becuse: > 1) it was very good and very compatible Doesn't match my experience. (Well, you probably tested it another way as I did.) > 2) it had very few bugd (iirc only 3) > 3) the bugs were *very* bad, I just don't remember exactly but > completely incapacitating Yes they're quite some bad bugs. Some of these are in RxDOS's COMMAND.COM replacement RxDOSCMD (or, as I call it now, RxCMD) which I will probably fix too. > 4) the programer was the author of "Undocumented DOS" Michael > Podanoffsky, the best book around, but he just vanished (abandoned?) Errm, nope. I think Mike did contribute to "Undocumented DOS" (you can ask him by e-mail), but his own book was "Dissected DOS". It concentrates on the RxDOS 6.00 source instead of showing disassembled MS-DOS code. Of course I've both books on hand here. > 5) it was just MS-DOS 6.22, and now FreeDOS has many important things, > one being FAT32 which I cannot live without. True for RxDOS 6.00 (shown in "Dissecting DOS") but not for RxDOS 7.x. The newer RxDOS releases have FAT32 (just as DOS-C) plus LFN functions *inside the kernel*. That is you shouldn't need DOSLFN to use LFNs. However both features will often not work as expected because they're slightly buggy and incompatible. One of my goals is to improve this. Regards, Christian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Create and Deploy Rich Internet Apps outside the browser with Adobe(R)AIR(TM) software. With Adobe AIR, Ajax developers can use existing skills and code to build responsive, highly engaging applications that combine the power of local resources and data with the reach of the web. Download the Adobe AIR SDK and Ajax docs to start building applications today-http://p.sf.net/sfu/adobe-com _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedosfirstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user