Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
Who gives a shit? It's included in MS-DOS 6.22, it'll be included in FreeDOS. It's not hurting you is it? You don't suffer from erectile disfunction because you ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erectile_dysfunction - because you can't write correctly :-D In short, I don't think EXE2BIN belongs in BASE for FreeDOS. So do I. I don't know of anybody using it I don't use it and have no clue for what it is supposed to be useful. Other things to remove from BASE: - KERNELS 2040 - WDE 0.30 - UPX Things to add: - KERNEL 2040 - WDE 0.30 - some useful archivers (UNTGZKIR, 7-ZIP) - some useful and small compilers (FASM ? NASM8086 ?) -- ~~~ wow ~~~ -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
BTW, what's the goal of EDLIN ??? Never used it ... But please keep DEBUG, I'm using it (but not as ASS'embler, maybe add FASM also ?) -- ~~~ wow ~~~ -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
Hi! BTW, what's the goal of EDLIN ??? Never used it ... It is there for nostalgic reasons and aims to be the DOS text editor which is translated into most languages ;-) But actually even the author of MS EDLIN barely used it, so we can be happy to also have our EDIT text editor. But please keep DEBUG, I'm using it I agree. It is good to have a generic classic debugger even when more fancy things like 386SWAT exist. DEBUG is still great for smaller tasks, people are used to the syntax and our DEBUG is actually quite extended :) Eric -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, Eric Auer wrote: Hi! BTW, what's the goal of EDLIN ??? Never used it ... It is there for nostalgic reasons and aims to be the DOS text editor which is translated into most languages ;-) But actually even the author of MS EDLIN barely used it, so we can be happy to also have our EDIT text editor. EDLIN was dropped from MS-DOS base after 5.0, though IBM kept it a little longer, only dropping it from 7. It was intended to be replaced quickly but never was, probably because it was very light and could run on anything. But please keep DEBUG, I'm using it I agree. It is good to have a generic classic debugger even when more fancy things like 386SWAT exist. DEBUG is still great for smaller tasks, people are used to the syntax and our DEBUG is actually quite extended :) To the point the DR DOS people actually took their SID debugger and hacked it into a version of DEBUG! (They had, originally, quite different syntaxes.) -uso. -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
Hi, On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 2:03 AM, dos386 dos...@gmail.com wrote: In short, I don't think EXE2BIN belongs in BASE for FreeDOS. So do I. I don't know of anybody using it I don't use it and have no clue for what it is supposed to be useful. In old days, MASM, LINK, EXE2BIN was the norm. These days, any linker worth its salt can already do that. Like I said, LINK supposed came with MS-DOS until 4.x, for some reason. No idea why anybody else (DR-DOS, etc.) would include EXE2BIN without at least LINK. And I just double-checked, the kernel uses EXEFLAT, not EXE2BIN, so I have no idea. (I was halfway wondering if maybe now or at one time they used it, but guess not. At least the copyright to EXEFLAT is from 10 years ago and still mentions DOS-C.) Other things to remove from BASE: - KERNELS 2040 - WDE 0.30 - UPX UPX is too useful, IMHO, though I know some shun it (which seems weird). And I don't think WDE is included in there (yet). At least a quick search couldn't find it in BASE or UTIL. Things to add: - KERNEL 2040 - WDE 0.30 - some useful archivers (UNTGZKIR, 7-ZIP) - some useful and small compilers (FASM ? NASM8086 ?) WDE might be too low-level for most users. I dunno, I vaguely thought it was already in UTIL (or somewhere), but guess not. Still a cool tool, but not hugely crucial, I guess. Some archivers are already in UTIL. But yeah, perhaps at least UNZIP should be in BASE. Dunno, Jim doesn't want any disruptive changes in 1.1, maybe FD 2.0. -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
Hi, On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de wrote: BTW, what's the goal of EDLIN ??? Never used it ... It is there for nostalgic reasons and aims to be the DOS text editor which is translated into most languages ;-) Presumably it's for limited automated scripting (e.g. edlin changes.txt) a la *nix ed. Also, on *nix, ed is used as recovery editor, usually statically linked, when everything else is borked. Though sometimes you can find vi too. Well, ed is the standard *nix editor. The difference is that edlin doesn't support regex. sed is the *nix stream editor (loosely based upon ed) and does line-by-line editing (and not in-place), hence it can edit files bigger than memory (and supports better scripting, though arcane). But actually even the author of MS EDLIN barely used it, so we can be happy to also have our EDIT text editor. Tim Paterson? Yeah, it was just a quick hack for him, but apparently some (MS-DOS) were slower to upgrade to full-screen than others (DR-DOS). (...and just to combine e-mails...) (Steve Nickolas): EDLIN was dropped from MS-DOS base after 5.0, though IBM kept it a little longer, only dropping it from 7. It's still included in 32-bit Windows (and debug and edit95 too). ;-) Yeah, with MS-DOS 5.0, EDIT/QBASIC was standard, so they didn't need it anymore. It was intended to be replaced quickly but never was, probably because it was very light and could run on anything. Writing a good text editor isn't easy, and there have been probably thousands (see http://www.texteditors.org for a list). Besides, nobody can agree what to use: VIM, GNU Emacs, etc. etc. -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
Op 29-7-2011 19:02, Rugxulo schreef: - KERNELS 2040 - WDE 0.30 - UPX UPX is too useful, IMHO, though I know some shun it (which seems weird). And I don't think WDE is included in there (yet). At least a quick search couldn't find it in BASE or UTIL. I can't even recall what WDE was for anymore. I'll check if any old kernels still present and will remove them, though the SYS and batchfiles in there are usefull. UPX is sometimes shunned due to the NRV compression library used, which is proprietary, and thus sometimes considered incompatible with opensource software. There's an opensource UCL library, and the resulting UPX binaries are available. I'll use those as soon as someone can guarantee me they run on 386+ instead of 80586+ / 80686+. UPX is convenient to have around indeed, if space limited. The bugreports showed that the extra FDISK utility included in FreeDOS doesn't like UPX due to a file checksum (integrity test) being done before running. - KERNEL 2040 - WDE 0.30 - some useful archivers (UNTGZKIR, 7-ZIP) - some useful and small compilers (FASM ? NASM8086 ?) I'm pretty sure 2040 has been added, though I might have forgotten that on the 360KB bootdisk image. Some archivers are already in UTIL. But yeah, perhaps at least UNZIP should be in BASE. Dunno, Jim doesn't want any disruptive changes in 1.1, maybe FD 2.0. Depends how you define 1.1. A small base set has limitations. Having a full CD as Jeremy and Blair prepared in the past, should offer enough opportunity to add programs to people's desire. -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] EXE2BIN
Hi, On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Bernd Blaauw bbla...@home.nl wrote: Op 29-7-2011 19:02, Rugxulo schreef: I can't even recall what WDE was for anymore. disk editor, basically for viewing raw disks and/or editing or saving bits to wherever. Not useful except for hardcore nerds. http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/disk/wde/ I'll check if any old kernels still present and will remove them, though the SYS and batchfiles in there are usefull. I agree too too many kernels around to test can be confusing, but checking against an older one can help spot regressions. UPX is sometimes shunned due to the NRV compression library used, which is proprietary, and thus sometimes considered incompatible with opensource software. There's an opensource UCL library, and the resulting UPX binaries are available. I'll use those as soon as someone can guarantee me they run on 386+ instead of 80586+ / 80686+. The included UPX307D.BAT (by me!) doesn't even have -march in it, so only -mtune was used. So it's safe (386 only). DJGPP defaults to -mtune=pentium anyways. UPX is convenient to have around indeed, if space limited. The bugreports showed that the extra FDISK utility included in FreeDOS doesn't like UPX due to a file checksum (integrity test) being done before running. XFDISK? I posted to the bugtracker (a few days ago) the one-byte patch by Eric :-)) to fix that. Some archivers are already in UTIL. But yeah, perhaps at least UNZIP should be in BASE. Dunno, Jim doesn't want any disruptive changes in 1.1, maybe FD 2.0. Depends how you define 1.1. A small base set has limitations. Having a full CD as Jeremy and Blair prepared in the past, should offer enough opportunity to add programs to people's desire. Since the installer requires it anyways, it's more or less BASE.;-) -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeCOM SVN (was: Updates to software list)
Hi, On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote: On 7/16/11, Bernd Blaauw bbla...@home.nl wrote: Anyone got experience with the watcom port of FreeCOM yet? Or too experimental / work-in-progress? Bart said it works pretty well, but it's only in SVN (and I don't have a client installed on this machine), so you'll have to grab and build it by yourself. Today I grabbed it from SVN r1694 to test (since, surprisingly, PuppyLinux already had an SVN client ... or maybe the DevX add-on gives it, who knows). Seems Bart is still making small tweaks here and there (e.g. 2 hours before I grabbed it!). So I suspect he may not be done yet! ;-) https://sites.google.com/site/rugxulo/FREECOM.ZIP?attredirects=0d=1 (*temporary* location, heh, but that's OW19-built binaries and sources, but I didn't test the non-XMS swap version, and I'm not 100% sure that one's 8086-friendly, but a quick grep didn't show anything obvious in any makefiles, so ) BTW, I think I did find an obscure regression (bug), if anybody is interested: http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/file/7zip/7zdecode/7ZDEC922.ZIP Try rebuilding that with DJGPP (don't worry, it's very easy). I actually used my one-floppy lite GCC 2.95.3, but I assume any will do. The problem may?? have to do with this line (though works fine on older 2006 compile of FreeCOM XMS-Swap). At least (once I disable echo off), that's where things start to act funny (and more or less truncate chars where any command after that won't work and it's basically useless and needs a reboot): if not %STUB%== copy /b %STUB% + %SEVENZIP% %SEVENZIP%.exe NUL So maybe it's a bug with COPY, not sure. (Bart is probably busy, and perhaps adding this to the real bugtracker may be preferable, but I'm posting here so more people can test.) I can't reproduce this otherwise, though; normal use didn't show any other problems (yet). -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] UPX and XFDISK (was: EXE2BIN)
Hi again, On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote: UPX is convenient to have around indeed, if space limited. The bugreports showed that the extra FDISK utility included in FreeDOS doesn't like UPX due to a file checksum (integrity test) being done before running. XFDISK? I posted to the bugtracker (a few days ago) the one-byte patch by Eric :-)) to fix that. It's small enough to just reply here: (quoting): Hi, I found a 1 byte patch to make xfdisk UPXable :-) Use a hex editor and change the byte at fba0 from 75 to eb: 000fb90: 009a c20e 7310 bfee 051e 57e8 0b5a 08c0 000fba0: eb28 bf08 0d1e 579a 4008 7310 bf08 0d1e -** done :-) 000fbb0: 57bf 92d7 0e57 6a00 9adb 0973 109a 4008 Luckily xfdisk even says at which moment it checksums itself. Please check if it still behaves as it should afterwards. And remember to UPX with --8086 option :-) [-- Eric Auer] (Rugxulo): You may want to use upx --ultra-brute -lzma --8086 these days. -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Edlin 2.15 binaries (was: Updates to software list)
Hi, On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Bernd Blaauw bbla...@home.nl wrote: We use an online tool to edit the software list via a web browser, and several admin folks have the ability to update the software list in this way. You can also contact Pat, Aitor, Eric, Rugxulo, Mateusz, or Jeremy. Mirroring to Ibiblio has to improve still, might want to doublecheck that. Kernel, SHSUCDX and Edlin (what's a binary?) are easy examples of being outdated. (Too easy to forget!) I've just now compiled (and only very briefly tested) Edlin 2.15 with OpenWatcom 1.9: https://sites.google.com/site/rugxulo/EDLIN215.ZIP?attredirects=0 (includes srcs for GPL compliance ... and yes that's a very generic filename, but I was trying to be 8.3 friendly, feel free to rename it or mirror it or suggest me to or test it or patch it or whatever ...) I'm pretty sure (IIRC) that Kitten/NLS support here is still broken, though, but for now, this is still the latest official version. So anybody really wanting i18n support will have to use a hardcoded (compile time) msg header file (until we fix it). P.S. The 16-bit binary is really really slow and memory cramped. If somebody cares, feel free to make suggestions! -- Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
