Re: [Freedos-devel] Clock
You don't need permission to write programs. If you want to write it, do so. If nobody finds it useful, then at least you learned something in the exercise. If folks find it useful, they will use it, and you will have learned something from the exercise. On Jan 29, 2015, at 8:30 PM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: Hello!I was wondering,is there an alarm clock utility needed for FreeDOS?It would be a console clock,with alarm functions.If I am given a yes,I will program it and have it ready for everyone within two days. -Jayden -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Instituting a vetting process for FreeDOS software
There's nothing wrong with quick basic. The only issue is that it's not free/opensource, but freebasic is. It also has a qb compatibility mode, so porting your programs to freebasic would be a trivial task. If you want to compile with basic, then by all means, give freebasic a try, it works, it's free, it's opensource, and anyone can use it if they so choose. No reason to abandon your quickbasic work. Of course, this isn't to say learning c/c++ is bad either, that also works, but if I may, I'd suggest using either gcc or watcom, instead of turbo C, just because they are also opensource, and while turboC is free, it's not opensource, and the free status is subject to change at any time. Admittedly, it's not likely it will change, but still. ... On Jan 27, 2015, at 10:16 AM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: I see your point.It makes sense.(Although there is a QBASIC compiler which creates EXE's,which I use).I have found a solution too this problem (for me).At least a half a month ago,I've started learning turboC++.In another month,I should be ready to create simple programs for the community.(As far as QBASIC,I'm just gonna step back on this one,as I don't wish to anger anyone).So,I've started learning turboC++.I may still make the occasional QBASIC program,but other than that,I will be making everything in C++.If there is a problem with this,please respond back.I thank everyone for their patience with this topic. :-) -Jayden On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com wrote: On 1/26/2015 1:27 PM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: I have noticed that this is an explosive topic.Some people think it doesn't matter the source,and others disagree.From what I'm reading (I may be wrong),but it seems from what I'm reading in this discussion that a program can only be submitted to freeDOS if it is made with a specific compiler. Well, I think that there are two separate issue at hand here. 1) Jim (and a couple others) would like to see that each and every piece of software associated with FreeDOS is written in an Open Source programming language. There is not directly any definitive rule about a specific compiler or language being used, but at there is some general preference to use C, with the preferred compiler being used being first Turbo C (back in the good old days 8-) ) and later OpenWatcom, after it was released by Sybase as Open Source some 13/14 years ago. 2) another issue however is how well a certain language (or a specific implementation hereof) is suited for a certain task. For example, you are referring yourself to QBASIC,, which is an intepreter, requiring the QBASIC executable to be present to execute. That would eliminate it pretty much for a lot of low-level tasks, and not only for speed and memory requirement issues. It would be a pretty bad choice for a replacement or alternative for the existing command.com, just as command.com's batch processing language would be a (really) bad choice for a security program. Ralf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. http://www.avast.com -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Re: [Freedos-devel] Instituting a vetting process for FreeDOS software
On Jan 27, 2015, at 11:24 PM, Ralf Quint wrote: But I would seriously discourage the use of gcc, as that is not going to help to produce anything useful for DOS, as it by and large is a *ix based and targeting compiler, which has only be shoehorned rather crudely to produce code for DOS... Ok, good to know. I did use gcc for a (very) short time under dos, and while it was a bit problematic to setup (paths had to be right, environment variables had to be set) it did the job, but I wasn't trying to do anything fancy with it, so don't know how well it handles complicated stuff, and if it's as bad as indicated, then I guess I'll stop recommending it. :-). Interestingly enough, I've seen loads of free C compilers, but very few with source, though I did purchase one that was shareware many years ago (the purchase gave you the right to obtain the source, and modify the compiler if desired), but I never did anything with it. I did write an assembler though, just to prove to myself it couldn't be done in the time frame alloted, only that one backfired, and it was actually a workable assembler in just under a week. Nothing approaching commercial quality you understand, but it worked. I did that, because I'd read a book claiming that a beginner assembly programmer could produce a working compiler in a week. I didn't believe it, so set out to prove the author wrong. And, as mentioned, it did indeed work as the author stated, which really surprised me. But, the point of the sideline here is just to point out that dos compilers aren't all that difficult to write, so if necessary, adapting gcc or some other compiler and making it part of the freedos project could be done. Not likely to be done mind you, but it could is all I'm saying. Regardless of what folks settle on, as the final guidelines, folks must remember they are (mostly) only guidelines, and I'm sure exceptions can and will be made given sufficient reasons to do so. I agree whole heartedly that freedos should contain complete source for it's programs (just like some linux distros do), but I'm also of the opinion that free tools are preferable to commercial ones, (something the majority of folks seem to agree with), but I'm also of the opinion that opensource should be used where possible (an opinion not shared by most it seems) and that's ok, it's only an opinion, and I have no authority over the project in any way, so it remains my opinions only. :) I think folks really should use what works for them, but if two things work equally well, and one of them is opensource, then by all means, opt for the opensource option. That's my take on it, and I'll shut up now, since I think this topic has drifted somewhat from the original intent, and I'm really not out to cause any trouble. I'd love to see the freedos project thrive, and even the kernel evolve, so I'm always willing to lend a hand if desired. I can help with the code reviews, as we did them where I worked several years ago, since we were a cmm level 5 group, and code requirements were pretty strict. I know nothing like that is necessary here, only stating for the record I have experience, and am willing to assist if/when wanted/needed. And, who knows, if I can think of something useful, perhaps I can contribute to the freedos library too. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Instituting a vetting process for FreeDOS software
I think that the language the program is written in shouldn't be a concern, as long as there are freely available compilers for said language. I.E. Pascal has free pascal, basic has free basic, asm has all kinds of assemblers, c has gcc, watcom, and so on. This would expand the scope some as to what's acceptible, but honestly, as long as compilers are freely available, opensource, and easily attainable, I see no reason to reject something just because it's not in the quote preferred language unquote. If it becomes necessary, restrictions can always be placed on which compilers may be used, since it may be difficult or impossible to recreate binaries with newer/older versions of some of the available compilers, and we want to make it as easy for folks as possible, but rejecting something because it's not in asm or c just doesn't make any sense to me. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Multi user system
Actually, I'm fairly certain qb does allow interrupts to be called. It requires use of an include (can't remember which one off hand), but all you do is configure the interrupt call, then call the subroutine in the include, and poof, generated interrupt. I'm not a user of quickbasic, I always used things like powerbasic or turbo pascal or turbo C when programming in dos, since I never liked the way qbasic apps took over the computer entirely to the exclusion of all else, but in this case, considering what you're trying to do, that's probably a good thing. I'll dig around here and see if I can find any programs using the interrupt calls, I'm sure I have some, then I can post the details. -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Multi user system
Yah, freebasic should do the job quite nicely. Although, I've not tried using the dos version of it, I do like the linux version. I'd use it on windows too, except that my windows programming is done with delphi or powerbasic, both of which are excellent products, only one of which is still being updated and supported though. Nowadays, if you want delphi, you gotta purchase some insanely expensive substitute, which allows you to download older versions if needed, but powerbasic still sells for less than 200 bucks, so usually, that's where my windows development time goes. :) However, I know freebasic does have a dos version, and I'm fairly sure it would support interrupts, so there shouldn't be any issue there. -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion
Nobody says you gotta run a 32-bit version of dos on a system that isn't 32-bit. What's wrong with just leaving the version that's already running there, and just use the 32-bit version on 386+ machines. Nobody said the current version would disappear just because a 32-bit version shows up. Still a nonissue as far as I'm concerned. On Jan 3, 2015, at 2:04 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote: On Sat, 3 Jan 2015, Travis Siegel wrote: On Jan 2, 2015, at 6:29 PM, Michael Brutman wrote: People are free to fork off and make a new project based on FreeDOS. No problem there. But once you break compatibility with existing applications, you lose a lot of your potential user base. And as soon as you go to 32 bits, you lose all of the early hardware. I'm puzzled at this. Why does going to 32-bit mean all old hardware will be broken? Because old hardware exists, like my 5160, that runs DOS and is still 16-bit? Obviously you can't run a 32-bit OS on a 5160, but DOS will run just fine. All of that would be broken by moving to 32-bit. 32-bit os doesn't mean no old hardware, it simply means drivers need to do something to make the translation. ...And how do you expect to run this OS on a 5160? Or an AT? Systems that run DOS just fine now? You knock out probably half the audience for FreeDOS by eliminating pre-386. -uso. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion
+1 On Jan 4, 2015, at 11:27 PM, Jim Hall wrote: I'm traveling, and likely won't be able to check email again or update the roadmap on the wiki until Wednesday. With a few disagreements, it looks like the consensus remains this: *- FreeDOS 1.2 should be an update/refresh from FreeDOS 1.1. No major changes. Improved installer is a good idea.* *- FreeDOS 2.0 should be 16-bit. Make FreeDOS feel more modern, but keep it DOS. We can improve the userspace. Keep supporting old PCs, but support new hardware where we can. UEFI may be tricky (see SeaBIOS discussion).* *- If FreeDOS-32 will break DOS application compatibility, it should not use the FreeDOS name.* This seems a clear direction. I'll admit that I'm curious what the kickstarter might achieve, but I'm not hopeful. So while a FreeDOS-32 kernel that ran 16-bit apps while adding new features would be very cool, it doesn't seem realistic. And it breaks hardware compatibility anyway. So let's take it off the roadmap. If they can demonstrate feasibility of FreeDOS-32 running 16-bit programs while adding new features, we can consider it and discuss it at that time. But I don't think we want to forecast it for a release (that is, not 2.0 or 3.0 ... it's up to them to demonstrate feasibility, then we'll pick up the topic again.) If no serious disagreements with the above, I think we can consider this topic done, and I'll update the roadmap on the wiki later this week. If you agree, please reply with +1. If you disagree, please share your thoughts by Tuesday. Sound fair? -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion
On Jan 1, 2015, at 3:46 AM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: I too would love to see a fully modern DOS. As would I, and I believe everything mentioned in the email would be perfect for a 32-bit dos. I believe it can be done, and the whole give each program it's own virtual 86 machine is one I've wondered about for quite sometime. It shouldn't be difficult, and actually, I read somewhere that the initial version of windows did this, but of course, I can't confirm that, since the only version of windows 1.0 I ever had was on an xt where such a scheme wouldn't have worked anyhow, not to mention, I haven't a clue where that machine wound up at. :) Otherwise, each program being spawned in it's own virtual 86 machine, and leaving things in protected mode as much as possible makes perfect sense to me, and it was what I'd figured would happen to dos eventually, but it never did. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Kickstarter project for FreeDOS 2.0
Actually, opendos version 7.01 (or caldera dos depending on when you purchased it) did have multitasking, and it worked fairly well. The problem was, setting it up and getting it to run properly was a bear. I did finally accomplish it, but it was a tough nut to crack, and I didn't use it long, due to other issues with hardware, but it went far beyond msdos 5.0 task switching, and actually allowed full-blown multitasking. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion
On Jan 2, 2015, at 6:29 PM, Michael Brutman wrote: People are free to fork off and make a new project based on FreeDOS. No problem there. But once you break compatibility with existing applications, you lose a lot of your potential user base. And as soon as you go to 32 bits, you lose all of the early hardware. I'm puzzled at this. Why does going to 32-bit mean all old hardware will be broken? Why does it mean old 16-bit programs won't work? Neither one of these issues are a problem if the 32-bit is handled properly. There's no reason it can't be done. I mean, look at linux. It's a 32-bit os, but it has been successfully compiled and run on xt class machines. 32-bit os does not mean no 16-bit apps, it simply means special handling is due such apps. 32-bit os doesn't mean no old hardware, it simply means drivers need to do something to make the translation. That's all. I see no conflict. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion
On Jan 1, 2015, at 8:31 PM, Jim Hall wrote: It seems clear a consensus is appearing, but I'll give folks another few days to chime in. That will give me time to continue on website cleanup things, anyway. :-) I think primarily, your summary hit the nail on the head, with the caveat that if a 32-bit dos could be built that still maintained the backward compatibility for those programs that needed it, it would *not* be a bad thing, in fact, it'd be embraced wholeheartedly. Of course, the chances of that are slim, but if it could be pulled off, freedos would do something no other dos has ever managed, and that would sure be a boon. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 1.2 and 2.0 roadmap discussion
On Jan 1, 2015, at 10:44 PM, Dave Pratt wrote: Are there other benefits you see to the 32 bit DOS? A 32-bit dos would break the 640K barrier permanently for one thing. For another, multitasking would not only be possible, it would probably become the norm. I know I'm not the only one who would love to have an os that's dos compatible, has loads of memory, and could switch tasks, and still do so in less than 5 megabytes of space. (ok, probably more like 20-50 megabytes of space when all is said and done, but still) ... -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] drives.exe
On Dec 26, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: I thought the same as Ralf and was surprised to see the vertical bar being used, and I also wasn't aware you could have more than 26 drives either. But Drives now checks for letters A - Z, the additional symbols and all numbers too. That oughta pretty well cover it lol Heh. Good deal. I'll give this one a try and report back. Got both opendos and windows xp machines I can test, so should be fun. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!
Are you kidding? There's been many many times I wanted a feature that would allow me to do a dos function in the background while I kept doing whatever it was I was already doing in the foreground. A way to switch to a second shell, do something, and switch back would be fantastic. (btw, I'm a huge powerbasic fan, do you have your old code available somewhere? I'd love to have a look at it. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] New software!
On Dec 23, 2014, at 1:57 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote: (btw, I'm a huge powerbasic fan, do you have your old code available somewhere? I'd love to have a look at it. I hear you there, PowerBASIC was awesome in its day and in fact it was the using of this language that let me get my GUI done to the furthest level of completion - despite it still never getting finished lol The entire PowerBASIC source for version 1.42 of my GUI's kernel can be found here http://mercurycoding.com/k142.bas. Thanks for that, grabbed it. As far as I know, powerbasic is the only company that still actively sells and supports a dos compiler. Their version 3.5 is still available for purchase. I have their windows version too, though I'm 1 version back (running pbcc 5.0, and pbwin 8.0), but still an excellent product. I am glad they still support dos, but it sure does make it hard to opensource pb code, because nobody wants to pay for the compiler these days. :-(. Anyway, getting off topic here, sorry folks, but thanks for the url, already downloaded it, will begin fiddling with it, to see what I can do with it. I've never been that great at i386 assembly, but I'm decent enough to figure this all out with a bit of study. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] drives.exe
I don't know how thorough you want to be, but msdos 5+, and some versions of both opendos and ptsdos, you can actually have more than 26 drives, up to 32 if I remember correctly. I saw (once) which characters they used for the additional 6 drives, but I don't remember what they were. Looking in the ascii table beyond capital letters, you have [, ], \, `, and ~. I'm fairly certain the backslash character wasn't used, but I think the | (vertical bar) was, so perhaps that's the additional symbols, but if you want to cover those drives, you'll of course need to check. :) Of course, the number of folks running dos these days that have more than 26 drives is vanishingly small, so it's probably a nonissue, but just thought I'd raise the issue anyhow. -- Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Website updates
I don't know how much help I can be, but count me in. I'll assist as much as I can, (perhaps I could help with the free/no source portion of the work). I've used wikis before, though not the freedos one, so would need an account there. Thanks. -- Comprehensive Server Monitoring with Site24x7. Monitor 10 servers for $9/Month. Get alerted through email, SMS, voice calls or mobile push notifications. Take corrective actions from your mobile device. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154624111iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS Roadmap: (Was Getting started
As far as dos networking goes, there's several network apis/programs
that can be used. ka9q is an excellent example of what dos can do,
and it works on nearly anything. (I had it running on an xt at one
point, and it handled multiple users just fine).
There's the krin tcp packet drivers, which seem to have drivers for
just about any kind of card you'd like to support (since most that
aren't supported can emulate one of those that is), and there's also
packages (at the application level) that can turn any comm program
into a tcp/ip capable application, such as 1fossil, or (I think)
rlfossil. I used to use rlfossil to log into shell accounts, bbses,
and other telnet servers using {commo} as my comm program under dos.
I'd simply use ka9q to make my initial tcp/ip connection, drop out of
it, load rlfossil, load commo, then adtdip address and poof, I'm
connected just as if I'd used commo to dial the phone and connect
directly to the system in question.
So, there's all kinds of ways to handle networking under dos, though a
single entry-point supported directly by freedos would certainly
provide simplicity for those looking, and if some method was developed
to allow freedos to use ftp, telnet, rlogin, ... directly from the dos
prompt with no additional drivers, that would be even better.
hth
--
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] File creation times
On Jul 2, 2014, at 1:38 PM, Matej Horvat wrote: I noticed that many files on my FreeDOS partition do not have a creation time, or rather they claim to be created in 1980. For a long time I thought that this is a bug, but today I looked at the kernel source code and found out that file creation times are never actually set. The file hdr\fat.h does define dir_crtime and dir_crdate in the dirent structure, but a search didn't reveal them being used anywhere. I compiled myself a new kernel with two simple changes to init_direntry in kernel\fatfs.c: Thanks. I too will make this change. I don't use my dos partition much these days, (using macos mostly now, and a few linux boxes) but when I do, it'd be nice to have this set. Always wondered myself why it wasn't done, but it never bothered me enough to go fix it. :) And, as mentioned in the thread, few (if any) utilities actually supported it, so ... But, thanks for the patch anyhow. -- Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Do not use any code from ms-dos release!
I'm still wondering why there's nothing to take advantage of these multi-core processors to allow someone to run multiple oses simultaneously using one core for each os. No reason you can't use task switching, and run dos, windows, linux, and others all on the same machine, simply dropping each os on it's own processor, and letting it loose. No need for emulation, and no need to virtualize anything (except possibly the video) since keyboard input wouldn't be an issue unless you switched specifically to that cpu. I'm really puzzled why such a system doesn't exist. I haven't a clue how such a thing could/would be implemented, but it's obviously possible, so why hasn't it been done? I realize there's not a huge demand for multiple oses on a single machine, but having linux/windows on the same pc, each booting from it's own hd, using it's own cpu, and not interfering with the other operating systems on the computer would be a huge boon for some, since there'd be no emulation required, no virtualization, and 100 percent native code execution. I think some of the bare metal hypervisors come close to this implementation, but they still have emulation layers instead of granting direct cpu access, so they don't really fit the bill. -- Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available. Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free. http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Do not use any code from ms-dos release!
Bah. I couldn't download the stupid thing anyhow, because apparently, ya gotta login just to read the blog post. Thanks, but no thanks. I do not now, nor do I wish to have an ms account. I'll pass, thanks. (same for google) If I can't hit the page, click download, and have the file show up on my drive, I'm not the least bit interested in downloading it. And, anyway, dos 2.0 did things way differently than 3.3+ , especially for file access, (fcbs anyone) so any use anyone would get out of 2.0 source would be less than minimal anyhow. It's probably closer to cpm than real dos anyhow. Not that there's anfything wrong with cpm, loads of products based on cpm, and I have source of that too, though I've never used them. I just like having things, even if I never use them, I guess I'm labeled as a collector, but having never contributed to freedos, I have nothing to fear from looking at such code. I'm really not an os kind of person. They fascinate me, and I love seeing how they do things, but I just don't have the know how to actually code for one, my assembly skills just aren't up to the task. Utilities are different, anyone can write those, and I have written some (none I've givven to freedos though) though I still have hopes of getting freedos to include a screen reader, but work is slow on porting from a86 to something freedos users can use free of charge, so it will likely be a while before I have anything ready for distribution. But I do like to see how things are done, and that's why I'm on this list, all kinds of internals are very interesting to me, even though I don't (usually) understand everything about them. -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS limits! and FDNPKG v0.93a released
If you want flat memory model, and unlimited disk space, it sounds like os/2 is what you want. It's a real shame IBM stopped supporting/ selling it. Wonder if we could get IBM to opensource it. Likely not, but it's a nice idea. As for windows, if you want to have flat memory models, and as much disk space as you can use in a programming language, check out powerbasic at http://www.powerbasic.com. It's something I've used for years, and believe it or not, they still sell and support their dos version of powerbasic. Of course, the dos one doesn't have all the nice memory/disk features the windows version of the compiler has, but there's nothing better for getting down and dirty with the innards of the os, and writing a console windows app that has no memory restrictions. It's an excellent compiler, and no serious basic programmer should be without it. Unfortunately, for some reason, when I tried to get it added to a list of basic compilers I found somewhere, the maintainer of the list told me they wouldn't add it, because they didn't think it was it's own compiler. I'm still puzzling over that one, but to each his own I guess. Anyway, the console compiler produces text-mode programs, that will use all available memory, run on any version of windows from win95 through win8, and even their dos version of the compiler has some nice features, like tsr support. It's a nice compiler, and for 49 bucks for the classic version (I think that special is still going on) you really can't go wrong there. -- Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with 2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Developing GUI for none programmers
Really? Since when does my browser version matter just to click a flipping download link. Google won't give m the file, because it says my version of safari is unsupported. This is getting rediculous. For godsake, an html link is a frekin' link, hth cares what program cliks on the link. Anyway, you may want to put a plain html download link somewhere, since google seems to be an elitist when it comes to who can actually download files from their sharing services. *grumble* On Feb 11, 2013, at 9:35 AM, Евгений Нежданов wrote: Great. Put it on a web page. Kuda? ;) I put archive with LEVOS (my written GUI; but not complete and bugged) into the Google Drive: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-UOUlCd4JxJU1hTdHdia2N0ckk/edit? usp=sharing (PASGUI.ZIP; 56 KB). -- Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013 and get the hardware for free! Learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013 and get the hardware for free! Learn more. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Source Code Released: 386SWAT, QLINK, and DPMIONE
On Jan 25, 2012, at 7:01 PM, Bob Smith wrote: At long last, I am releasing the source code for three of my old DOS projects: 4. Finally, if you are interested and I can find the time to wade through it all, I'll release the source code for Qualitas MAX (a.k.a. 386MAX). I don't remember seeing anything else about this one. I'd be very interested in seeing this one. Any idea if/when it'll be available? Just asking, there's really no rush, I can't do anything with it at the moment, probably be a few months at least before I'm prepared to work on this sort of stuff again. Would be nice to have though. Thanks. -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] final preview for FreeDOS 1.1 release
I'm assuming this is only a preview (as mentioned) and not a release candidate? There's lots of things missing from this one (just browsing the iso image, not actually installing it you understand) I'm puzzled why the actual fd iso is inside another iso that would be basically unusable if booted on a pc (unless I'm missing things on the image, like I said, I just browsed the disk in osx finder, didn't actually try installing it or anything) Also, a point for the networking section. Has anyone thought about including ka9q in this section? It's not wattcp to be sure, but it sure has a lot of power, comes in gpl versions (or at least some versions do) and it can turn a dos machine into a full blown tcp/ip server. I used it (briefly) back in 1996 when I first got my softcon.com domain up and going until I had my linux boxes ready to take the load. Also, I'm not seeing any development tools, was this deliberate? Good to see fd moving along. hth. -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
Mike, I like your suggestions. One thing that always bothered me about dos versions that have come out since ms dropped the ball is their complete lack of inovation. I realize there's only so much that can be done if you're intending to keep 100 percent compatibility, but still, it's not hard to imagine such details as enumerated here. One thing I wonder is why nobody builds a dos multitasker that simply spawns a new virtual 386 machine for each new dos task. That would keep 100 percent compatibility, and still allow complete and free multitasking. The virtual 386 machines would take care of virtualizing keyboards and video output automatically, since it's all built into the 386 hardware. I'm fairly certain, none of that ability has been removed with the newer cores and such. I see no reason why this sort of thing couldn't work. I'm not positive, but I think this is the approach vmix386 took, and why it worked so well (at least with my testing) it would be fantastic to have such an os. Another thing I wonder, is why it is that nobody has built anything that allows executing of multiple oses on a single computer, using one cpu core for each os, thereby allowing each os to run natively on it's own cpu, thus eliminating the need to vertualize anything (except perhaps output and input), but then each and every os would have it's own cpu, and all of them would run at full native speeds. Then you could have as many oses running as you have cpu cores to handle them. (still waiting) I guess someone will do it eventually, but until they do, I'll stick with my osx machine, and my several dos boxes scattered everywhere. :) -- BlackBerryreg; DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA Learn about the latest advances in developing for the BlackBerryreg; mobile platform with sessions, labs more. See new tools and technologies. Register for BlackBerryreg; DevCon today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy1 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Freedos and lack of drivers
On Sep 11, 2011, at 5:36 PM, jhall wrote: There are multitasking DOSes (DR-DOS, RDOS, TSX-32 ??, etc.) inherently useless Not useless, really. For example, MS-DOS 5 introduced their DOS Shell that supported task switching, a rudimentary form of multitasking. I used to use this feature all the time as a student: for example, to run a word processor and spreadsheet program as separate tasks. I think I usually had a command.com shell in there too. That let me write up my data analysis for labs much faster, because I could quickly jump back to the spreadsheet or my own analysis program to look at results, then describe it using the word processor. I'd love to see this as a feature added to FreeDOS one day. There's always vmix, it's pretty good, and actually does true multitasking. Last I saw, it was trying to become an os in it's own right, where it could be used as a dos replacement. I don't think this got very far, but if I recall correctly, it is on sourceforge, or something similar. That program worked so well, my screen reader would read all the active windows simultaneously, which really reaked havoc with understanding what was going on, but it did work, and worked very well. :) Perhaps freedos could talk to the vmix folks, and ask them to release code to the 2.67 version, so we could include it into freedos as it's own shell, or something similar (or was the latest 2.87, I forget) It may be worth a try though. -- Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] eSpeak (was: Re: provox dos screen reader)
Heh, I didn't even know there was a version of espeak for dos. However, turning text to wav files is inherently slow, and wouldn't even begin to operate in a screen reader environment where text on screen really really needs to be heard instantly (or close enough) I doubt anyone would use a computer if they had to wait for the screen to be translated into a mode they could use before it could be read directly. :) I'm not discouraged, :) there's no way this could work as a general screen reading package, it's just too slow. Though, I admit, I've not tried it so can't say from experience how well (or not) it works, but since provox speaks text directly, and uses hardware the blind person probably already has, it's not subject to the delay while text is converted on the fly. However, if someone doesn't have a hardware synth, espeak's method is certainly better than nothing, and just might permit someone to use the computer who otherwise couldn't do so, so I'll definitely be taking a look at this one. Espeak is popular on linux, so there must be something it's doing right. :) -- uberSVN's rich system and user administration capabilities and model configuration take the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the tools developers use with it. Learn more about uberSVN and get a free download at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] provox dos screen reader
On Jul 16, 2011, at 11:38 PM, Rugxulo wrote: Included with this zip file is the a86 assembler used to compile the code, which obviously would need to be removed for the freedos distribution copy, since it's a completely separate application. Just for the record, A86 is shareware, so in theory it's fine including it (though obviously NASM would be better). Of course, I find it funny that you use an ancient copy (3.22 from 1990!) when even latest 4.05 has been stable for 10 years!! ;-)I assume there's no hard dependency on that particular version. Oh well, it doesn't matter right now, I just find it funny. ;-) I own the registered copy of a86, and I know 4.05 is the latest. I didn't write the provox program, merely took it over from it's original author. Apparently, 3.22 is the version used for development. Another reason why I figured it would be better to separate the assembler from the screen reader. As for porting it to nasm, that's not something I've looked at yet, I expect it won't be a straightforward port, but perhaps it will surprise me and work out quickly and easily. :) I'll not be able to check into that for quite some time though, since I'm in the middle of a move, and my hardware is scattered between two different states. -- AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on Lean Startup Secrets Revealed. This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] provox dos screen reader
On Jul 17, 2011, at 5:37 PM, Rugxulo wrote: However, DTC.LIB doesn't seem to have sources, but I'm not sure what exactly that does or if it's needed or what the deal is, so we'll have to wait for Travis to explain that. (Perhaps that is the optional hardware synthesizer part??) Hmm, good point. The dtc.lib is the library required to talk to dectalk synthesizers. Source is not available, but I've seen it included in other products as well, so apparently it's not against the license to distribute it in and of itself, as long as it's part of another package. I did manage to talk to the dectalk folks some years ago, and although the topic of the libs came up, I didn't specifically ask if it was ok to distribute it as part of another package, though it would almost have to be, unless their license specifically states it should be compiled into the executable and not distributed separately. That would kind of defeat the purpose of the lib in that case I'd think, but if anyone else knows better, I'm of course willing to take reports to the contrary. I'm fairly certain (though not positive) that obtaining the initial copy of the dectalk libs did require a fee of some tipe, as far as I know, there's no restriction against distributing the lib itself (since it's necessary for program usage) and since none of the other files are included, it should be ok, but again, the keyword is should. I know dec had sold dectalk somewhere along the line, though who owns rights to it now is a huge question, (and was at the time I had been talking to the original dectalk folks) but since I personally haven't heard a peep out of anyone relating to the lib, and as far as I know, nobody else has either, it may be a moot point, but that's only gpl/ freeware talking, not commercial distribution plans as is needed with some of the other windows/dos screen readers, so there may or may not be something lurking there, but I tend to doubt it. However, it's easy enough to remove the lib if it becomes absolutely necessary, which would disable support for dectalk synths, though I'm relatively sure (though not positive) that other external synths will still operate. I can do some testing after I get all my hardware in a single location. Again, I stress that this archive as currently posted is as I received it, and not with the modified docs/license file I worked on afterwords. I'm of course willing to make whatever changes are necessary to get this into freedos archives, since it really is the best place for it, so that folks who need it will have a much easier time finding it. As for a86, it may be possible that the author will be silling to relase shareware terms on a copy that could be included in freedos as well, even if it is w/o source, just for such cases as this. I only talked with him once, but he sure seemed like the reasonable sort at the time. -- AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on Lean Startup Secrets Revealed. This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] provox dos screen reader
The provox screen reader for dos which I would like to have added to the freedos ftp site is currently located at: http://www.thesiegelsnest.us/provox/provox7.zip I don't (currently) have access to my other computer where I modified the documentation, and created a .lsm file. I will have this in a couple weeks. The program was put under the gpl, and I had contacted the original author some time ago asking permission to try to get it included in the freedos distribution, as well as take over development. Both requests were granted, and now that I have a sourceforge developer account, I'll likely upload the program there for initial distribution, after I get back to the machine with the modifications on it. The program currently only works with hardware synthesizers (since there weren't any software synths for dos. However, since finding one of these devices is relatively easy, since most folks who have them no longer use them with a few exceptions such as myself and a couple others I'm aware of, this shouldn't be a show stopper. If a software synth could be developed, provox could easily be extended to support such a synth, though I doubt such a program would be useful, because of the amount of memory it would require, and under dos, that's generally not practical. So, If there are any other folks on list who use screen readers under dos, feel free to grab this one and give it a try. Adding additional synths is (relatively) simple, so if anyone has one that isn't supported other than artic synths, I'm already working on those, I'd be happy to try to add them. Of course, artic synths can already be made to work by using either the porttalk or accent sa options, but both modes lack some useful features supported directly by the artic synthesizers themselves. Included with this zip file is the a86 assembler used to compile the code, which obviously would need to be removed for the freedos distribution copy, since it's a completely separate application. Otherwise, it's ready to go, and can be added at any time after I get my version with updated docs and lsm file off the other machine. hth. -- AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on Lean Startup Secrets Revealed. This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] getting programs into the freedos site/archive (was confused by NLS-settings)
On Jul 10, 2011, at 9:20 AM, Rugxulo wrote: You know what can edit arbitrary-sized files? sed !!! (My favorite!) Maybe that should be included in FreeDOS 1.1 by default! ;-)) Hmm, speaking of including things in freedos. How does one get a program added to the freedos distribution/archive? I have a screen reader I'd like included for those of us who need such a thing. Some time ago I did fill out the lsm info, but had no idea where to send the completed file. Any suggestions? -- AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on Lean Startup Secrets Revealed. This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] bug in edit
On Jun 1, 2011, at 6:16 PM, Jim Michaels wrote: 0.7d is what I am using. it seems to work much better when - the files are fully extracted - the files are not readonly (I was copying off of cd), especially the .cfg file I should think. so it's my problem. when copying files off of a cd, the readonly attribute is automatically set on the file. If I were unzipping, this would not be a problem I should think. so I have an issue with my OEM cd. this has nothing to do with the freedos cd (unless you guys are doing the same thing). This is perfectly normal. The read-only bit gets set by the os everytime you copy something from a read-only media (how could it be any different) It's not the os's fault, it's the media. It's read- only, so the files copied from it are the same way. If you copy the zip file, then extract the zip, you won't have this problem, but if you copy the files directly from the cd, then this is the expected behavior. p://p.sf.net/sfu/quest- sfdev2dev___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- Simplify data backup and recovery for your virtual environment with vRanger. Installation's a snap, and flexible recovery options mean your data is safe, secure and there when you need it. Discover what all the cheering's about. Get your free trial download today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-dev2dev2 ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] C/C++ BIOS backup
There is a program that I used to use to backup my award bios, it was written in assembly, and I don't remember if it came with source or not, but it was called something like cmossave or something like that. Perhaps you can locate it and take a look to see how it was done. There was a nice explanatory document in the archive that explained how the process was done. No code (that I remember), but you should have little trouble reproducing the process from the documentation provided. If you can't find it, drop a line, and I'll try to dig up more details out of this old memory of mine. :) -- Nokia and ATT present the 2010 Calling All Innovators-North America contest Create new apps games for the Nokia N8 for consumers in U.S. and Canada $10 million total in prizes - $4M cash, 500 devices, nearly $6M in marketing Develop with Nokia Qt SDK, Web Runtime, or Java and Publish to Ovi Store http://p.sf.net/sfu/nokia-dev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] Standardized development tools
Regardless of what is finally settled on for use, it really needs to be something that works from the freedos environment itself. It would be kind of silly to tell folks that they need a windows machine just to recompile some code they're currently already using. If that's open watcom, great, if that's djgcpp, great, if that's pcc, great. it's really not an issue of what is chosen, only that what is chosen can work within ghe freedos environment itself, and recompile itself from a standing start. Including kernels, and all supporting files. -- This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] is anybody even using my apps?
I don't actually see any software on that page. I suppose there's a link somewhere, and I'm just missing it, but I didn't see anything that looked like it linked to programs that would be dos executables with source. Direct url? I too have a piece of software I'd like to get into the freedos distribution, and am not sure how to do so. I've filled out the form required, but have no idea where to send it. I have a screen reader, one I got permission to take over development on from the original developer, and would really like to get it into the freedos distro, so if anyone knows where I should send/upload this thing, please let me know. -- This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] IDE CDrom/Dvd
I don't know about others, but I for one would find a udf driver *extremely* helpful. Sometimes, when you have a cd/dvdR disk, it's tough to tell if it has anything on it, and being able to boot from such a disk would be worlds better than cramming a full system backup with only limited files to get you started on a cd, when you could store the entire boot opartition on a single disk if udf capabilities were available. My vote is to do it. :) Of course, that's easy for me to say, I won't be the one writing the thing (I don't know enough about either assembly or udf formats to help with this one) hSure wish I did though. -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] [Freedos-user] Freedos 1.1 status
I have contacted the author of provox, and he has given his permission to include provox in freedos. I've also run it under freedos, and it works perfectly. It's likely the code could use some tweaking to make it work better, but it does ork as is. Currently, folks will need an external synthesizer (well, some internal ones work too) because soundblaster-type cards aren't supported directly. Whether this is something that can be corrected or not I suppose is a matter of time/research/programming. As distributed, provox7.zip contains a copy of the a86 assembler, likely this will need to be removed for the fd distribution, since a86 is shareware, and not gpl. I'll fill out the required forms, produce a compatible zip file, and send wher ever it needs to go to be included on the main site. It's already under the gpl so no trouble there. Thanks for your reply. On Sep 2, 2008, at 3:26 PM, Aitor Santamaría wrote: Hello, I guess in a CD there is enough room. The only need is that the basic rules are observed: basically that the license must be GNU-GPL 2 or weaker, and just to observe some basic rules about how the packing should be. Have a look at the several documentation how-tos at fd-doc to get an idea. Also you should fill-in a LSM record for the program, so that it can be tracked. FD-DOC: http://fd-doc.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php LSM: http://www.freedos.org/freedos/software/ Greetings and good luck! Aitor - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] help for the freedos bugzilla
Not *exactly* sure what this is, but if you want to feed me some info, (just so I can understand what's being moved) not that understanding what it is is necessary, but I like to be informed. :) I can certainly assist with the move. I've hosted sites for roughly 12 years, and probably managed to run into every snag there is between now and then. :) If you can provide details (offlist of course) I can probably help get things moved. Hope this helps. On Aug 27, 2008, at 3:03 AM, Markus H. Maussner wrote: hi sorry for somehow offtopic and posting to the 2 ml's but i know of ppl who are just in one of them... the freedos bugzilla runs on one of my systems. but its too slow and sometimes theres errors. this is because its running on a rather small box. long storry why etc. is there somebody who wants to take over the task moving the stuff from one site to the other. the current one is a debian box the target system is a solaris10 container (shouldnt make much problems since it runs on perl and thats avalible on both systems) it got moved twice and everytime there where some problems, (missing perl stuff, css not right etc etc). the person who helped bevore is right now covered with work and told me he cant help in the near future. regards tassilo - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
