> I was reading the Undocumented Dos book and according to it Win 3.x goes > to extraordinary lengths to insure that the operating system it is > running on os MSDos and not one of the alternatives.
Yes, but note that the described "AARD" code is not really used in any retail release (UDOS 2nd Edition, p.15) and doesn't really influence the performance of Windows even if it's used. > Plus it replaces parts of DOS while running. (Either for underhanded as > the book hints at or legitimate concerns it doesn't matter at this point) > This probably some of the reason for the problems. Win 3.x will probably > never be 100% on FreeDos, nor will a compatible Win 3.x GUI ever be 100%. Some sites suggest to switch off the 32-bit disk access and 32-bit file access (if the used Windows version supports either) because they conflict with larger or newer disks and FAT32. Some other SYSTEM.INI settings regarding DOS critical section handling and stuff might also be useful to setup a stable Windows configuration for a non-MS DOS. > I have been looking and asking questions on both of the Wine and ReactOS > forums and it looks promising. > > I think I will buy a copy of windows 3.x on EBay and use that for > comparison. I can barely remember what it looked like and what is all > there. LOL > I was thinking of calling the GUI Janus after the code name for windows > 3.11. Which I think should be ok legalwise. Thoughts? Sounds good. > The lack of license for HX DOS Extender concerns me a bit as well. If > code is posted with no license can it be considered public domain? I > emailed the author but have not gotten a response. Well, it's called freeware (including the source code). I think you can use it for anything, but wait for someone else to answer this. > Also I remember from my pre dot net days using a program which would > inspect a dll and identify all the public methods/functions that it has. > Would this be considered legal? If so anyone remember what that > program is/was? I used it at a client site to integrate with a 3rd party > DLL and application. Since disassembling MS-DOS is "considered legal" by UDOS and RBIL authors (and these sources are "considered legal" by all members of the FreeDOS project) I think there's no problem using some DLL examination tool. Regards, Christian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
