Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
defrag requires a VGA screen to use the user interface There is an option to run it from the command line - Oorspronkelijk bericht - Van: Mateusz Viste mate...@viste.fr Aan: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Verzonden: Zondag 24 mei 2015 11:29:32 Onderwerp: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility Hi all, Not sure that anybody cares about this, but just in case - I recently tested the 1-diskette FreeDOS distribution ODIN on an 8086 PC, and spotted a few more or less serious problems. I got the ODIN image from odin.fdos.org, and more specifically this: http://odin.fdos.org/fdodin06.8088.zip Now, here goes the list. MEM: The command MEM is missing. MEMA: Prints out garbage to screen and quits. KEYB: immediately crash with Runtime error 105 at :252F DEFRAG: Blanks the entire screen, and freezes SORT: Freezes. When executed with DIR | SORT it tries to write something to my diskette (!) that I had write protected, fortunately. MORE: Exactly same symptoms as SORT. DIR: When using DIR/P, DIR seems to think that the screen is 1-row high, and asks for a keypress for every line (the screen is CGA-based, 25 rows). MODE: MODE MONO makes the screen blank. Had to type in blindly MODE BW80 to recover. Might not be a bug, but would be nice if MODE could check if a given mode is supported, before running it. cheers, Mateusz -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Le 26.05.2015 01:10, Rugxulo a écrit : As for FreeDOS, well, the shell was really slow. My original idea was to get rid of Microsoft and get more features thanks to FreeDOS, but it was really too slow. If something specific like DIR or COPY were too slow, that would be nice to know. But FreeCOM (shell) is quite a beast, so it's fairly complex (and has no current maintainer). If you want to try again (presumably with 0.84-pre2 but maybe also 0.82pl3), go ahead. It would be nice to know the exact commands that are bottlenecks for you. But there may not be any huge fixes any time soon. So, for now, a workaround would be to use third-party tools (under FreeDOS, not MS-DOS, natch) that are faster (e.g. 1dir or Zcopy or whatever, I can't remember everything). Are you trying to say that Microsoft's DOS and COMMAND.COM are much more optimized than FreeDOS/FreeCOM :-) ? I will give it try again when I have some time. Since yesterday, there are 201+ machines in the TOPBENCH database ;-) Cheers -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
I am back.Perhaps decreasing the number of buffers in FDCONFIG/CONFIG.SYS? On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:05 PM, perditi...@gmail.com wrote: There are multiple issues being brought up in this discussion. 1 - there is a desire for an 8086 compatibility [a goal of FreeDOS project] 2 - there is desire still for 360KB floppy images [haven't seen a request for in years (that I recall off-hand), but something easily supported] 3 - video requirements and compatibility, VGA/CGA/Mono 4 - compatibility issues with pre AT class PCs [difficult as usually requires access to one for testing or someone to test and provide feedback since emulators and modern hardware don't help here] 5 - general speed and compatibility issues [specific issues should be reported as bugs to maybe be addressed, but I wouldn't expect much to change in terms of speed issues ] Did I miss any? And I need to update a bunch of stuff on fdos.org. :-) Jeremy -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
MORE and SORT typically work on files and console input. When piping a temporary file is created. IIRC that is done even in UNIX from which the file handle idea and pipes originated from. I do believe MODE MONO was specifically for working with Hercules and monochrome video cards, whereas working with CGA or better in B/W required MODE BW80. However, there are idiosyncrasies across DOS versions (IBM DOS vs MS OEM adapted DOS) that make this hard to track out. IBM DOS 3.1 Compaq MS DOS 3.31 MS-DOS 5.0 MS-DOS 6.x in my opinion represents the stable Microsoft compatible and stable versions of DOS. On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:27 AM Mateusz Viste mate...@viste.fr wrote: On 25/05/2015 06:33, Ralf Quint wrote: MEMA: Prints out garbage to screen and quits. What is MEMA? No idea, only Steve knows probably :) I assumed it is some kind of replacement for MEM (since MEM is missing on ODIN), but because of its crashing, I couldn't check. KEYB: immediately crash with Runtime error 105 at :252F Do you use any country modifier? If so, it's bug in KEYB opening up the language/country file NOT in a read-only mode, showing up due to having the floppy disk write protected... No, no modifiers at all - bare FreeDOS without autoexec nor config.sys files. MORE: Exactly same symptoms as SORT. ditto. Why does MORE requires a temp file is beyond me. BUt of course if it does, that's life. Will see then to maybe write a replacement that wouldn't need to write to disk(ette), if I can't find any free alternatives. DIR: When using DIR/P, DIR seems to think that the screen is 1-row high, and asks for a keypress for every line (the screen is CGA-based, 25 rows). That must be some issue with your PC, works fine for me and should not be related to 8086 code or not at all... Not related to 8086, but this might be related to CGA. Are you a proud owner of a CGA, too? I was recently fixing a bug in another software that was exhibiting exactly same behavior (1-line virtual screen on CGA). The bug was related to the fact that on a CGA the location 0040:0084 does not contain the screen's height (no need, since CGA can't be anything else than 25 rows anyway). The solution was to test for an EGA, if EGA or better found then fetch 0040:0084 for screen's height, otherwise assume 25 rows. MODE: MODE MONO makes the screen blank. Had to type in blindly MODE BW80 to recover. Might not be a bug, but would be nice if MODE could check if a given mode is supported, before running it. Would have to test but that could be compatible behaviour with MS-DOS... Maybe. I have only MSDOS 3.3, and this one seem to lack MODE MONO entirely. It does understand MODE BW80, though - so maybe it's not 'missing' MONO but simply not exposing it when running on MDA/HERC incompatible hardware. Mateusz -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? FreeDOS Kernel/Command.com is 99.5% C. and that's the relevant part. I believe it's almost entirely C, which could explain the lower performance, BS. whenever FreeDOS is notably slower (or faster) then any other DOS, its due to better/different disk caching; anyDOS spends hardly any cyles inside the kernel in *real world applications* the noticed slower performance on a IBM XT is probably due to FreeDOS is too pessimistic about disk changed. although even MS-DOS 5 was mostly written in C. BS. the MSDOS Kernel (at least up to 6.22) is 100 % in MASM (in some queer assembler macro language). some (but far from all) utilities are in C C: ADDDRV ATTRIB BACKUP COMP EXPAND FC FDISK HELP JOIN LABEL MEM REPLACE RESTORE SETVER SUBST INTERLNK ASM: APPEND ASSIGN CHKDSK DEBUG DISKCOMP DISKCOPY DOSKEY EDLIN EXE2BIN FASTOPEN FIND FORMAT GRAFTABL GRAPHICS KEYB LOADFIX MODE MORE NLSFUNC PRINT PRINTFIX RECOVER SHARE SORT SYS TREE XCOPY DISPLAY COUNTRY POWER RAMDRIVE SMARTDRV Heck, I've read that parts as early as 3.1 were mostly written in C. unlikely. AFAIR at this time there were no reasonable DOS C compilers available. Tom -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Svarog86 - a micro FreeDOS distro for 8086
Nicely done. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Mateusz Viste mate...@viste.fr wrote: Hello all, I was looking recently for an easy way to run FreeDOS on my 8086 (meaning grab an image from the internet, write it on a diskette and boot), but I noticed there is no such image available. There are many bootable diskettes with FreeDOS all over the internet of course, but none of them is specifically designed to run on 8086-class computers. I tested a few of them, and they either won't boot, or, if it boots, a big part of included tools will make the computer crash, freeze, or otherwise malfunction. This is why I decided to start my own micro distribution with FreeDOS, targetted specifically to ancient 8086/8088 hardware. It's nothing very ambitious really, my goal is to provide a set of boot disks on the most common formats, that would: - run on 8086/8088 computers - provide a more or less up-to-date version of FreeDOS and tools - make it possible to install FreeDOS to a hard disk The distribution is built in an automated way, so different disk formats will always be consistent between each other. I named the distribution Svarog86, and it's available here: http://sourceforge.net/p/svarog86 Current images contain are very, *very* basic for now: only a working kernel + command.com and two or three tools. But now that I have a working automated build system, I will be able to add tools to it in incoming days. Mateusz -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Svarog86 - a micro FreeDOS distro for 8086
cvbxcv PLONK Tom -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Svarog86 - a micro FreeDOS distro for 8086
cvbxcv On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:56 PM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org wrote: Nicely done. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Mateusz Viste mate...@viste.fr wrote: Hello all, I was looking recently for an easy way to run FreeDOS on my 8086 (meaning grab an image from the internet, write it on a diskette and boot), but I noticed there is no such image available. There are many bootable diskettes with FreeDOS all over the internet of course, but none of them is specifically designed to run on 8086-class computers. I tested a few of them, and they either won't boot, or, if it boots, a big part of included tools will make the computer crash, freeze, or otherwise malfunction. This is why I decided to start my own micro distribution with FreeDOS, targetted specifically to ancient 8086/8088 hardware. It's nothing very ambitious really, my goal is to provide a set of boot disks on the most common formats, that would: - run on 8086/8088 computers - provide a more or less up-to-date version of FreeDOS and tools - make it possible to install FreeDOS to a hard disk The distribution is built in an automated way, so different disk formats will always be consistent between each other. I named the distribution Svarog86, and it's available here: http://sourceforge.net/p/svarog86 Current images contain are very, *very* basic for now: only a working kernel + command.com and two or three tools. But now that I have a working automated build system, I will be able to add tools to it in incoming days. Mateusz -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Microsoft's COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: Le 26.05.2015 01:10, Rugxulo a écrit : As for FreeDOS, well, the shell was really slow. My original idea was to get rid of Microsoft and get more features thanks to FreeDOS, but it was really too slow. If something specific like DIR or COPY were too slow, that would be nice to know. But FreeCOM (shell) is quite a beast, so it's fairly complex (and has no current maintainer). If you want to try again (presumably with 0.84-pre2 but maybe also 0.82pl3), go ahead. It would be nice to know the exact commands that are bottlenecks for you. But there may not be any huge fixes any time soon. So, for now, a workaround would be to use third-party tools (under FreeDOS, not MS-DOS, natch) that are faster (e.g. 1dir or Zcopy or whatever, I can't remember everything). Are you trying to say that Microsoft's DOS and COMMAND.COM are much more optimized than FreeDOS/FreeCOM :-) ? I will give it try again when I have some time. Since yesterday, there are 201+ machines in the TOPBENCH database ;-) Cheers -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Hi, Have you read me carefully ? I have the original OS on the original floppies, thank you. And the problem is not about having more features or not. It is not about compatibility either. FreeDOS works like a charm on my machine. The problem, which is not really a problem, considering the added features, is that FreeDOS is slow, much slower than ms-dos. Of course, you don't see it, you use Pentium or better machines. DIR is awfully slow, access to disk is slow, DOS calls are slow, etc. compared to ms-dos on the same PC-XT. That has nothing to do with features or compatibility, but with optimization. And this was just a sidenote of mine, not a critic. By the way, FreeDOS was created with the idea to be 100% compatible even with the first PC and I myself contributed around 2005-2006 to provide older keymaps for PC-XTs, to correct some issues here and with some tools using 386 instructions in the 8086 version, etc. Thank you. Le 26.05.2015 16:25, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : Microsoft's COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch wrote: Le 26.05.2015 01 tel:26.05.2015%2001:10, Rugxulo a écrit : As for FreeDOS, well, the shell was really slow. My original idea was to get rid of Microsoft and get more features thanks to FreeDOS, but it was really too slow. If something specific like DIR or COPY were too slow, that would be nice to know. But FreeCOM (shell) is quite a beast, so it's fairly complex (and has no current maintainer). If you want to try again (presumably with 0.84-pre2 but maybe also 0.82pl3), go ahead. It would be nice to know the exact commands that are bottlenecks for you. But there may not be any huge fixes any time soon. So, for now, a workaround would be to use third-party tools (under FreeDOS, not MS-DOS, natch) that are faster (e.g. 1dir or Zcopy or whatever, I can't remember everything). Are you trying to say that Microsoft's DOS and COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM are much more optimized than FreeDOS/FreeCOM :-) ? I will give it try again when I have some time. Since yesterday, there are 201+ machines in the TOPBENCH database ;-) Cheers -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
On Tue, 26 May 2015, Edouard Forler wrote: If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? I believe it's almost entirely C, which could explain the lower performance, although even MS-DOS 5 was mostly written in C. Heck, I've read that parts as early as 3.1 were mostly written in C. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Most of the tools (format, etc.) were written in C, but command.com, io.sys and msdos.sys were written in assembly. For me, ms-dos is just these three files and especially msdos.sys. C is OK. C++ can be awful. It takes a lot of cpu to make the dynamic dispatch and memory allocation, since it's object-based. That's usually where the bottleneck lies. Ed. Le 26.05.2015 17:12, Steve Nickolas a écrit : On Tue, 26 May 2015, Edouard Forler wrote: If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? I believe it's almost entirely C, which could explain the lower performance, although even MS-DOS 5 was mostly written in C. Heck, I've read that parts as early as 3.1 were mostly written in C. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] Svarog86 - a micro FreeDOS distro for 8086
Hello all, I was looking recently for an easy way to run FreeDOS on my 8086 (meaning grab an image from the internet, write it on a diskette and boot), but I noticed there is no such image available. There are many bootable diskettes with FreeDOS all over the internet of course, but none of them is specifically designed to run on 8086-class computers. I tested a few of them, and they either won't boot, or, if it boots, a big part of included tools will make the computer crash, freeze, or otherwise malfunction. This is why I decided to start my own micro distribution with FreeDOS, targetted specifically to ancient 8086/8088 hardware. It's nothing very ambitious really, my goal is to provide a set of boot disks on the most common formats, that would: - run on 8086/8088 computers - provide a more or less up-to-date version of FreeDOS and tools - make it possible to install FreeDOS to a hard disk The distribution is built in an automated way, so different disk formats will always be consistent between each other. I named the distribution Svarog86, and it's available here: http://sourceforge.net/p/svarog86 Current images contain are very, *very* basic for now: only a working kernel + command.com and two or three tools. But now that I have a working automated build system, I will be able to add tools to it in incoming days. Mateusz -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Svarog86 - a micro FreeDOS distro for 8086
This is very good news for me. I was desperatly looking for this and about to make my own. is this based on freedos 1.1 ? thx Le 26.05.2015 21:04, Mateusz Viste a écrit : Hello all, I was looking recently for an easy way to run FreeDOS on my 8086 (meaning grab an image from the internet, write it on a diskette and boot), but I noticed there is no such image available. There are many bootable diskettes with FreeDOS all over the internet of course, but none of them is specifically designed to run on 8086-class computers. I tested a few of them, and they either won't boot, or, if it boots, a big part of included tools will make the computer crash, freeze, or otherwise malfunction. This is why I decided to start my own micro distribution with FreeDOS, targetted specifically to ancient 8086/8088 hardware. It's nothing very ambitious really, my goal is to provide a set of boot disks on the most common formats, that would: - run on 8086/8088 computers - provide a more or less up-to-date version of FreeDOS and tools - make it possible to install FreeDOS to a hard disk The distribution is built in an automated way, so different disk formats will always be consistent between each other. I named the distribution Svarog86, and it's available here: http://sourceforge.net/p/svarog86 Current images contain are very, *very* basic for now: only a working kernel + command.com and two or three tools. But now that I have a working automated build system, I will be able to add tools to it in incoming days. Mateusz -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Also,as far as I know,FreeDOS was written in C/C++. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:59 AM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org wrote: http://www.freedos.org/download/ Try this.Click on the floppy image at the bottom of the webpage. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: Thanks for proposing something. I don't mean to ask for an immediate solution to this issue. And I know the [dev] resources are low. If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? Also, as mentionned years ago on this list, I might have tested it with some useless extenders enabled by default. So I think there is room for investigation. Actually, the whole reflexion started when I saw this ODIN stuff. My first reaction was oh ? there's a specific 8086 Freedos distro called ODIN ? But now I see it's not very well maintained. Do you know if there is any 51/4 image of Freedos with a sort of minimal set of features available ? EF Le 26.05.2015 16:43, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : If it is slow..then..hmm.Perhaps we could somehow size down the memory block usage of all the FreeDOS calls/programs?Just tossing around ideas,as it would be cool to know someone is using an OS that can be used on modern and old PC's.(It's kind of the same thing as saying I can use windows 8 on a commodore VIC 20.It would be nice to know we reached that goal.). On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Le 26.05.2015 17:00, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : Also,as far as I know,FreeDOS was written in C/C++. C is essentially OK, but C++ is known to consume cycles, especially if the compiler is weak. E.g. Borland was fast at the time for the compilation, but the code produced was not very good. OpenWatcom is what I would go for today. Actually, I saw that Brutman did the same for mTCP and improved the performance of it just with this move. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
No worries and no hurries ! :-) Le 26.05.2015 17:07, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : Perhaps this is a start.Anyways,I will pick this back up later.I have other things to do right now. (sorry).I will continue researching and post back in a few hours. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:05 AM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org mailto:jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org wrote: Hmm...you could load everything in low memory (I think its the opposite of the LH command..it's been a while since I used the full version of FreeDOS).As for disabling features,try typing MODE MONO then editing the Fdconfig/config.sys files.As for disabling further features,perhaps using smaller drivers?Try getting some of the drivers from the MS-DOS disks (for the keyboard and such).Interrupt drivers tend to take up space,so try using smaller ones. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch wrote: This mix seems to be a very good idea. The other way round too (using freecom on msdos) Unfortunately the benchmarks like topbench test the machine, not the os, so they will not show the difference. How do you expect to measure the speed ? But in any case, the goal is not to rewrite freedos. The software is really good. If we can find some quick wins like disabling a feature to boost the speed, that will be good enough for me. thx Le 26.05.2015 16 tel:26.05.2015%2016:54, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : Haha.Well,I will begin working with an emulator (I don't have the official hardware).If I run across something,I will post it on this thread.FreeDOS applicatoins are compatible with MS-DOS,right?Perhaps using MS-DOS and running a FreeDOS command.com http://command.com http://command.com? Regards, -Jayden On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch wrote: Le 26.05.2015 16 tel:26.05.2015%2016 tel:26.05.2015%2016:41, Steve Nickolas a écrit : FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. I fully agree on this. The official OS of my XT is ms-dos 3.21 but the 6.22 works perfectly, and twice as fast as freedos. Back in 2006, the development of FreeDOS was really about correctness and compatibility with ms-dos, not about wow we could make a 64 bits version of this so I can work in text mode on my shiny Quad-core i7 with latest GTX ! EF -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
If it is slow..then..hmm.Perhaps we could somehow size down the memory block usage of all the FreeDOS calls/programs?Just tossing around ideas,as it would be cool to know someone is using an OS that can be used on modern and old PC's.(It's kind of the same thing as saying I can use windows 8 on a commodore VIC 20.It would be nice to know we reached that goal.). On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Haha.Well,I will begin working with an emulator (I don't have the official hardware).If I run across something,I will post it on this thread.FreeDOS applicatoins are compatible with MS-DOS,right?Perhaps using MS-DOS and running a FreeDOS command.com? Regards, -Jayden On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: Le 26.05.2015 16:41, Steve Nickolas a écrit : FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. I fully agree on this. The official OS of my XT is ms-dos 3.21 but the 6.22 works perfectly, and twice as fast as freedos. Back in 2006, the development of FreeDOS was really about correctness and compatibility with ms-dos, not about wow we could make a 64 bits version of this so I can work in text mode on my shiny Quad-core i7 with latest GTX ! EF -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
This mix seems to be a very good idea. The other way round too (using freecom on msdos) Unfortunately the benchmarks like topbench test the machine, not the os, so they will not show the difference. How do you expect to measure the speed ? But in any case, the goal is not to rewrite freedos. The software is really good. If we can find some quick wins like disabling a feature to boost the speed, that will be good enough for me. thx Le 26.05.2015 16:54, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : Haha.Well,I will begin working with an emulator (I don't have the official hardware).If I run across something,I will post it on this thread.FreeDOS applicatoins are compatible with MS-DOS,right?Perhaps using MS-DOS and running a FreeDOS command.com http://command.com? Regards, -Jayden On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch wrote: Le 26.05.2015 16 tel:26.05.2015%2016:41, Steve Nickolas a écrit : FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. I fully agree on this. The official OS of my XT is ms-dos 3.21 but the 6.22 works perfectly, and twice as fast as freedos. Back in 2006, the development of FreeDOS was really about correctness and compatibility with ms-dos, not about wow we could make a 64 bits version of this so I can work in text mode on my shiny Quad-core i7 with latest GTX ! EF -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
http://www.freedos.org/download/ On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:58 AM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org wrote: (http://www.freedos.org/download/).Try the floppy images here. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: Thanks for proposing something. I don't mean to ask for an immediate solution to this issue. And I know the [dev] resources are low. If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? Also, as mentionned years ago on this list, I might have tested it with some useless extenders enabled by default. So I think there is room for investigation. Actually, the whole reflexion started when I saw this ODIN stuff. My first reaction was oh ? there's a specific 8086 Freedos distro called ODIN ? But now I see it's not very well maintained. Do you know if there is any 51/4 image of Freedos with a sort of minimal set of features available ? EF Le 26.05.2015 16:43, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : If it is slow..then..hmm.Perhaps we could somehow size down the memory block usage of all the FreeDOS calls/programs?Just tossing around ideas,as it would be cool to know someone is using an OS that can be used on modern and old PC's.(It's kind of the same thing as saying I can use windows 8 on a commodore VIC 20.It would be nice to know we reached that goal.). On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
(http://www.freedos.org/download/).Try the floppy images here. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: Thanks for proposing something. I don't mean to ask for an immediate solution to this issue. And I know the [dev] resources are low. If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? Also, as mentionned years ago on this list, I might have tested it with some useless extenders enabled by default. So I think there is room for investigation. Actually, the whole reflexion started when I saw this ODIN stuff. My first reaction was oh ? there's a specific 8086 Freedos distro called ODIN ? But now I see it's not very well maintained. Do you know if there is any 51/4 image of Freedos with a sort of minimal set of features available ? EF Le 26.05.2015 16:43, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : If it is slow..then..hmm.Perhaps we could somehow size down the memory block usage of all the FreeDOS calls/programs?Just tossing around ideas,as it would be cool to know someone is using an OS that can be used on modern and old PC's.(It's kind of the same thing as saying I can use windows 8 on a commodore VIC 20.It would be nice to know we reached that goal.). On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Le 26.05.2015 16:41, Steve Nickolas a écrit : FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. I fully agree on this. The official OS of my XT is ms-dos 3.21 but the 6.22 works perfectly, and twice as fast as freedos. Back in 2006, the development of FreeDOS was really about correctness and compatibility with ms-dos, not about wow we could make a 64 bits version of this so I can work in text mode on my shiny Quad-core i7 with latest GTX ! EF -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Thanks for proposing something. I don't mean to ask for an immediate solution to this issue. And I know the [dev] resources are low. If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? Also, as mentionned years ago on this list, I might have tested it with some useless extenders enabled by default. So I think there is room for investigation. Actually, the whole reflexion started when I saw this ODIN stuff. My first reaction was oh ? there's a specific 8086 Freedos distro called ODIN ? But now I see it's not very well maintained. Do you know if there is any 51/4 image of Freedos with a sort of minimal set of features available ? EF Le 26.05.2015 16:43, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : If it is slow..then..hmm.Perhaps we could somehow size down the memory block usage of all the FreeDOS calls/programs?Just tossing around ideas,as it would be cool to know someone is using an OS that can be used on modern and old PC's.(It's kind of the same thing as saying I can use windows 8 on a commodore VIC 20.It would be nice to know we reached that goal.). On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
http://www.freedos.org/download/ Try this.Click on the floppy image at the bottom of the webpage. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: Thanks for proposing something. I don't mean to ask for an immediate solution to this issue. And I know the [dev] resources are low. If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? Also, as mentionned years ago on this list, I might have tested it with some useless extenders enabled by default. So I think there is room for investigation. Actually, the whole reflexion started when I saw this ODIN stuff. My first reaction was oh ? there's a specific 8086 Freedos distro called ODIN ? But now I see it's not very well maintained. Do you know if there is any 51/4 image of Freedos with a sort of minimal set of features available ? EF Le 26.05.2015 16:43, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : If it is slow..then..hmm.Perhaps we could somehow size down the memory block usage of all the FreeDOS calls/programs?Just tossing around ideas,as it would be cool to know someone is using an OS that can be used on modern and old PC's.(It's kind of the same thing as saying I can use windows 8 on a commodore VIC 20.It would be nice to know we reached that goal.). On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Perhaps this is a start.Anyways,I will pick this back up later.I have other things to do right now. (sorry).I will continue researching and post back in a few hours. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:05 AM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org wrote: Hmm...you could load everything in low memory (I think its the opposite of the LH command..it's been a while since I used the full version of FreeDOS).As for disabling features,try typing MODE MONO then editing the Fdconfig/config.sys files.As for disabling further features,perhaps using smaller drivers?Try getting some of the drivers from the MS-DOS disks (for the keyboard and such).Interrupt drivers tend to take up space,so try using smaller ones. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: This mix seems to be a very good idea. The other way round too (using freecom on msdos) Unfortunately the benchmarks like topbench test the machine, not the os, so they will not show the difference. How do you expect to measure the speed ? But in any case, the goal is not to rewrite freedos. The software is really good. If we can find some quick wins like disabling a feature to boost the speed, that will be good enough for me. thx Le 26.05.2015 16:54, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : Haha.Well,I will begin working with an emulator (I don't have the official hardware).If I run across something,I will post it on this thread.FreeDOS applicatoins are compatible with MS-DOS,right?Perhaps using MS-DOS and running a FreeDOS command.com http://command.com? Regards, -Jayden On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch wrote: Le 26.05.2015 16 tel:26.05.2015%2016:41, Steve Nickolas a écrit : FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. I fully agree on this. The official OS of my XT is ms-dos 3.21 but the 6.22 works perfectly, and twice as fast as freedos. Back in 2006, the development of FreeDOS was really about correctness and compatibility with ms-dos, not about wow we could make a 64 bits version of this so I can work in text mode on my shiny Quad-core i7 with latest GTX ! EF -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
On Tue, 26 May 2015, Edouard Forler wrote: Most of the tools (format, etc.) were written in C, but command.com, io.sys and msdos.sys were written in assembly. For me, ms-dos is just these three files and especially msdos.sys. I tend to favor this approach too. The resident components are better written in ASM for speed and reduced memory footprint while the userland is better written in C for ease of development and code-sharing between components. C is OK. C++ can be awful. It takes a lot of cpu to make the dynamic dispatch and memory allocation, since it's object-based. That's usually where the bottleneck lies. C++ is a terrible, imo, OS language. C is just at the right point between high level and low to be most useful for these things. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Hi, because there seems to be a lot of guessing going on in this thread: * the freedos kernel already does contain a disk buffer cache * maybe freedos is too pessimistic about floppy changes and flushes this cache too often, to be on the safe side... * a lot of the freedos kernel and shell is written in C * performance of C is good, parts of the kernel are in Assembly * if DIR is slow, maybe freedos makes too little use of buffers I guess this is hard to test, but try with a slow harddisk on XT. Read the CONFIG.TXT file about freedos config sys options BUFFERS and maybe also FILES, IDLEHALT, VERSION and others :-) As freedos is quite compatible, you can try freedos command.com with MS kernel and freedos kernel with MS command.com to see if that makes a performance difference. You can use VERSION=6.00 and if that is not enough, ANYDOS config sys options in freedos if the MS command.com complains otherwise. Cheers, Eric PS: Imre, why not auto-detect if VGA is available in defrag and if not, allow only command line mode instead of crashing? -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
Hmm...you could load everything in low memory (I think its the opposite of the LH command..it's been a while since I used the full version of FreeDOS).As for disabling features,try typing MODE MONO then editing the Fdconfig/config.sys files.As for disabling further features,perhaps using smaller drivers?Try getting some of the drivers from the MS-DOS disks (for the keyboard and such).Interrupt drivers tend to take up space,so try using smaller ones. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch wrote: This mix seems to be a very good idea. The other way round too (using freecom on msdos) Unfortunately the benchmarks like topbench test the machine, not the os, so they will not show the difference. How do you expect to measure the speed ? But in any case, the goal is not to rewrite freedos. The software is really good. If we can find some quick wins like disabling a feature to boost the speed, that will be good enough for me. thx Le 26.05.2015 16:54, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : Haha.Well,I will begin working with an emulator (I don't have the official hardware).If I run across something,I will post it on this thread.FreeDOS applicatoins are compatible with MS-DOS,right?Perhaps using MS-DOS and running a FreeDOS command.com http://command.com? Regards, -Jayden On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch wrote: Le 26.05.2015 16 tel:26.05.2015%2016:41, Steve Nickolas a écrit : FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. I fully agree on this. The official OS of my XT is ms-dos 3.21 but the 6.22 works perfectly, and twice as fast as freedos. Back in 2006, the development of FreeDOS was really about correctness and compatibility with ms-dos, not about wow we could make a 64 bits version of this so I can work in text mode on my shiny Quad-core i7 with latest GTX ! EF -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
OK, so that means there is no such image. This is a 1.44Mb image for a 31/2 floppy. I was asking for 51/2 360 KB images. After all these years, it seems I will have again to do my own. @Tom: yes, when talking about asm and c in ms-dos, at least for me, it was clear that some of the high-level part was written in C. msdos.sys which is for me the important part, has always been written in asm. Le 26.05.2015 16:59, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : http://www.freedos.org/download/ Try this.Click on the floppy image at the bottom of the webpage. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Edouard Forler edou...@forler.ch mailto:edou...@forler.ch wrote: Thanks for proposing something. I don't mean to ask for an immediate solution to this issue. And I know the [dev] resources are low. If I can find some time to do it, I would like to investigate why it is slow. ms-dos was written in assembly until ms-dos 4, however they kept much of it after that and as I said, ms-dos 6.22 works much faster on an XT. Is freedos written in assembly as well ? Also, as mentionned years ago on this list, I might have tested it with some useless extenders enabled by default. So I think there is room for investigation. Actually, the whole reflexion started when I saw this ODIN stuff. My first reaction was oh ? there's a specific 8086 Freedos distro called ODIN ? But now I see it's not very well maintained. Do you know if there is any 51/4 image of Freedos with a sort of minimal set of features available ? EF Le 26.05.2015 16 tel:26.05.2015%2016:43, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU a écrit : If it is slow..then..hmm.Perhaps we could somehow size down the memory block usage of all the FreeDOS calls/programs?Just tossing around ideas,as it would be cool to know someone is using an OS that can be used on modern and old PC's.(It's kind of the same thing as saying I can use windows 8 on a commodore VIC 20.It would be nice to know we reached that goal.). On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co mailto:usots...@buric.co wrote: On Tue, 26 May 2015, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Microsoft's COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM http://COMMAND.COM is not as great.Since when did it include two different memory versions (4dos)?FreeDOS includes extra commands that are built in,such as BEEP,SOUND,and a few other batch commands.As for compatibility with older computers,why not use their original OS?There are many archives online that have original zipped copies of MS-DOS.FreeDOS (As far as I know) is built for the more modern era (90's+).Before this time,computers didn't follow a standard hardware layout.One computer had a floppy port and no harddrive,and another required a master boot disk to boot.As for the WHY,some peopel just like vintage hardware.I do.Perhaps we could modify the original MS-DOS source,to keep it compatible with he original 8086 machine,while adding more features? Regards, -Jayden FreeDOS was, at least originally, intended to be a replacement and successor to said original DOS. Even MS-DOS 6.22 and PC DOS 7.0 still ran on 5160s and Tandy 1000s. I think these days there's more of an attitude of FreeDOS being mainly for use in VMs, rather than on metal. A shame, really. Personally, I went back to PC DOS - mainly because things always worked the way I expected them to (something not really true with FreeDOS). I don't think *my* goal of what *I* want out of FreeDOS is shared by most of the developers, so generally, I've stayed out of conversations while I watch what goes on. To be honest, I think works like MS-DOS 3.3, has the better hardware support of DOS 6, and some of the useful features from DOS 6, while still staying true to its roots as an OS for *8088* PCs is what I want - rather than mainly as an emulation mode for newer machines - and since the latter seems to be the preferred direction around here, I don't think my input is very much desired or desirable, so I don't say much. The benefit of FreeDOS is that it's *free* - and not free as in arr, matey. -uso. -- One
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS (ODIN) and 8086 compatibility
There are multiple issues being brought up in this discussion. 1 - there is a desire for an 8086 compatibility [a goal of FreeDOS project] 2 - there is desire still for 360KB floppy images [haven't seen a request for in years (that I recall off-hand), but something easily supported] 3 - video requirements and compatibility, VGA/CGA/Mono 4 - compatibility issues with pre AT class PCs [difficult as usually requires access to one for testing or someone to test and provide feedback since emulators and modern hardware don't help here] 5 - general speed and compatibility issues [specific issues should be reported as bugs to maybe be addressed, but I wouldn't expect much to change in terms of speed issues ] Did I miss any? And I need to update a bunch of stuff on fdos.org. :-) Jeremy -- One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
