Any usual commercial and shareware apps for msdos with an install
create its own dir. To have 100+ folders at apps is not good. why not:
2009/4/5, Mateusz Viste <mate...@viste-family.net>:
> On Sunday 05 April 2009 19:15, Marco Antonio Achury Palma wrote:
>> I agree is nice to have separated paths for base system and apps. This
>> is the good old way to make things. The most of the dos apps are self
>> contained without dependencies. One problem I remember is to have
>> path to all the apps, sometimes become bigger than the available
>> environment variable space.
>> A new different solution may be create a bat file for each app, or a
>> text database with descriptive name and path to any executable. this
>> is useful to generate automated launch menu.
> Well, the "\BIN" directory is only for system stuff. Any third-party things
> won't be there anyway.
> The real question is "is there any advantage to put some really basic system
> files into \BIN and more advanced one in \SBIN".
> I was thinking about making a difference between "package giving MSDOS
> functionality" and "other system enhacements", but as Jim said - it doesn't
> seem to be a quite fortunate choice, as it will most probably lead to a
> bigger mess than we have currently...
> The problem which is (at least to me) important know, is to decide how will
> we package 3rd package application for a FD v1.1 installation. The "old" way
> would be to put them into \programs and \games subdirectories of the FreeDOS
> install (that's how we done it in v1.0), but it doesn't sound right to me...
> Mateusz Viste
>> 2009/4/5, Mateusz Viste <mate...@viste-family.net>:
>> > On Sunday 05 April 2009 16:11, Jim Hall wrote:
>> >> I think Mateusz is suggesting separating the programs from the "base"
>> >> list (in ...\BIN) from those that are in "devel" or "util" (in
>> >> ...\SBIN). In this case, FORMAT would show up in ...\BIN.
>> > Yes, it was indeed my idea...
>> >> Imagine all the (new?) packages that should really be in "util" that
>> >> might be put in ...\BIN format because the developer/contributor wants
>> >> them to be in "base" (even though the program might not replicate any
>> >> original functionality of MSDOS.)
>> > I guess you're right here, Jim ;-)
>> > We should look at FreeDOS as an independant system, not just a MSDOS
>> > replacement...
>> >> It's better to keep with the original spec on this, use the ...\BIN
>> >> for all binaries.
>> > Okay, let's not change a wining team then :)
>> > How about installing 3rd party applications? I searched through FreeDOS
>> > technotes, but couldn't find anything related to packages installation
>> > paths...
>> > FreeDOS v1.0 was installing all third-party applications in the FreeDOS
>> > directory, which is IMHO a very bad thing. Many people wants to keep
>> > theirs
>> > applications in a separate path, for eg. on a different hard drive.
>> > Having a
>> > environement variable pointing to "the place where all my games/programs
>> > have to go" would definitely resolve this issue. That's something the
>> > FreeDOS installer should ask for at the installation (Where do you want
>> > to
>> > put FreeDOS files? Where do you want to put any non-freedos
>> > applications?).
>> > However, it's not a trivial thing to do, as we would need a way to tell
>> > "this is a FreeDOS package, while this one is 3rd party one". Nothing
>> > like
>> > that is ready today. Obviously, it would require some additional
>> > developpement on FDPKG, too...
>> > Best regards,
>> > Mateusz Viste
>> > --
>> > You'll find my public OpenPGP key at
>> > http://www.viste-family.net/mateusz/pub_key
> You'll find my public OpenPGP key at
Marco A. Achury
Freedos-user mailing list