> needed to support some. If Dos based Windows is
> used, Freedos is possibly being run on a computer
> that has 128+ megs of RAM. There are a LOT of
> old computers that have this much RAM.
And several operating systems that can run there ;-)
> Freedos can ask, "Are you on a Pentium, 486, 386, 286,
> or 8088," at install time. Based off of that info...
You typically install from CD today, so you can assume
a 386 or better, often Pentium or better CPU. Many apps
run on 8086, but to have decent memory management, you
typically want HIMEMX and a 386. Several drivers also
require that. There are also floppy distros for 8086.
I would not put too much extra 8086 fiddling inside a
CD distro installer if you ask me. Almost no apps need
a more modern CPU than 386, or would gain from a FPU.
Well, probably Arachne would... I also think FreeBASIC
had issues with 486sx and older CPU which lack a FPU.
> is possible to decide whether or not certain programs
> like Firefox for example make any sense. I seriously
> doubt that anyone wants to run Arachne on anything less
> than a 486 with at least 2 megs of RAM for example.
On any PC which is too old to run NT or Linux, you
probably want Dillo and not Firefox anyway... ;-)
Interestingly, Firefox depends mostly on GTK, Python
and Cairo. Python 2.4 already exists for DOS DJGPP.
Cairo has backends for GTK and Win32, but Nokia did
help with some QPainter backend for QT. It makes me
wonder how hard writing a VESA framebuffer backend
for DOS might be. On the other hand, I really wonder
how far HX is from running older Firefox for Win32.
Note that while DOS runs on modern hardware, it
does not necessarily make use of it. There is
no surround sound, multi-core, more-than-4-GB-
of-RAM or similar support, but it does not hurt
to have that hardware while running DOS either.
> of Linux that installs to a FAT directory and
> exits to Freedos when you are done would be fine
On the other hand, switching THAT way would not
be much faster than rebooting to DOS either ;-)
> In short, the state of Freedos's Arachne poses a
> security problem for anyone who needs to make sure
> that a graphical web browser has a local filter
You cannot install censorship in any DOS browser
because in DOS, every user always is the admin.
> Sure you might filter at the router to the net
That would be morer secure indeed.
Are you an open source citizen? Join us for the Open Source Bridge conference!
Portland, OR, June 17-19. Two days of sessions, one day of unconference: $250.
Need another reason to go? 24-hour hacker lounge. Register today!
Freedos-user mailing list