Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS 1.2 Missing Packages and XDEL

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

I have created "xdel/" under "util/file/", so your .ZIP (and the old
one) can now be found here:

http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/file/xdel/


On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Alain Mouette  wrote:
>
> On 10-05-2016 00:39, Rugxulo wrote:
>>
>> A quick search on iBiblio shows the following files:
>>
>> ./distributions/1.0/pkgs/xdels.lsm
>> ./distributions/1.0/pkgs/xdels.zip
>> ./distributions/1.0/pkgs/xdelx.lsm
>> ./distributions/1.0/pkgs/xdelx.zip
>> ./util/file/xdel204.zip
>>
> This is the updated version is 206c, only LSM and some files moved for
> compatibility by Jerome
>
> Last version only real difference is in 205: "added kittenization (by
> Blair Campbell)" and english/portuguese/spanish translations
>
> Thanks for updating it :)

--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Cobalt OS 1.2

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

I have not tested it, but 

On May 18, 2016 10:22 PM, "Corbin Davenport"  wrote:
>
> A few months ago I posted here about my new FreeDOS
> distribution aimed at beginner DOS users, named Cobalt.
>
> - VirtualBox is now fully supported. Right now Cobalt can detect
> if it is running under VirtualBox, and suggests the user disable
> the VT-x/AMD-V virtualization feature that breaks a lot of DOS
> programs. In the future, I'm going to try and extend this to
> some form of file sharing.

1). How are you detecting VBox?

2). What programs break? I'm not denying the possibility, but turning off
VT-X makes things much much slower. I honestly wouldn't turn it off for all
programs, by default.

3). File sharing? Good luck! Outside of VMSMOUNT (VMware specific), I'm not
aware of any others. Perhaps you can use FTPSRV?
--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Cobalt OS 1.2

[Corbin Davenport]

A few months ago I posted here about my new FreeDOS distribution aimed at
beginner DOS users, named Cobalt. Today I released Cobalt OS 1.2, and I
wanted to share the most exciting new changes.

- VirtualBox is now fully supported. Right now Cobalt can detect if it is
running under VirtualBox, and suggests the user disable the VT-x/AMD-V
virtualization feature that breaks a lot of DOS programs. In the future,
I'm going to try and extend this to some form of file sharing.

- Support for Windows 3.0, 3.1, and 3.11. Cobalt detects if Windows is
installed, and if so, tells the user they can use the 'RUNWIN' command to
start Windows. The runwin command is basically a batch file to run the DOSX
executable directly, since win.com has issues on FreeDOS.

- Greatly improved the installer to support repairing an existing
installation of Cobalt. And as always, you can 'upgrade' to Cobalt from an
existing installation of MS-DOS/FreeDOS without losing any files.

- Cobalt has switched to JEMMEX for memory management.

That's pretty much it, feel free to check out the GitHub project
 to download
the disc image. I would love to hear any feedback you might have.

Corbin 
--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS 1.2 Package LSM Data Verification

[Jerome E. Shidel Jr.]

Eric, 

> On May 18, 2016, at 12:24 PM, Eric Auer  > wrote:
> 
> 
> I would like to agree with Tom: It is good that FreeDOS comes
> with a nice collection of drivers for modern hardware! Those
> times when a DOS driver was included when people bought their
> CD drive have long passed. Also, there are no reasons to limit
> our distro to those minimal features of a few MS DOS disks ;-)

I am more than happy to include any suitable open source drivers.

> 
>>> an operating system without CDROM and network drivers doesn't sound
>>> very useful to me, even if everything has the correct license. YMMV.
>> 
>> I think that the key is to perceive FreeDOS as a replacement to MSDOS, 
>> nothing else (that is, "BASE")...
> 
> It is good to have a BASE download (probably with "live CD" or
> "live USB stick" function, not requiring but allowing install
> to other disks) if you want a basic no-nonsense system. Still
> I would like to see drivers included even in such a download.
> 
>> But then, for actually useful (practical) stuff, one has to rely on a 
>> FreeDOS distribution, like Svarog386, or collect the required "non-free" 
>> bits by hand over the internet.
> 
> It also is good to have a FreeDOS distro which contains a pile
> of nice useful free software, if possible fully open source. I
> think IBIBLIO also requires open source for the file hosting.
> 
> I would NOT want the FreeDOS distro to be limited by extremely
> specific license taste. As far as I am concerned, GPL 2 and 3,
> MIT, Artistic license, BSD license, public domain etc. are all
> perfectly fine for inclusion of packages in our normal distro.
> 
>> Otherwise I agree it can get a bit frustrating for actual users,
>> and that's the reason I started Svarog386 in the first place.
> 
> Looking at your package listing, Svarog386 is quite nice, but we
> should not give up the hope of having a nice plain FreeDOS distro.
> 
> Jerome, could you make a list of packages which existed in either
> FreeDOS 1.0 or 1.1 but are not currently included in 1.2, along
> with the reason for exclusion? I think we should indeed be a bit
> more generous regarding inclusion of packages! Thanks :-)
> 
> Regards, Eric
> 

Except for the following packages all other dropped and questionable packages 
are listed at the beginning of this thread. This list of packages shipped with 
1.1 and are not presently in 1.2. None of these packages are on the ibiblio 
repo for version 1.1 either.  I have not put any work into trying to include 
these packages as of yet.

DOSUTIL, No sources present in package. Might be buried on repos somewhere.
RIPCORD, FreeDOS release related program, Compatibility not tested. 
SAMCFG, I don’t know if it is applicable anymore.
SYSLNX, There has to be a newer version, not in repo for 1.1.
WATTCP, No Source files present
CALLVER, FLASHR, SHIELD and UPX not in repo for 1.1

Almost all of the dropped packages in the top of this thread, never shipped 
with FreeDOS. However, they are on the Repo for v1.1.

FreeDOS 1.1 shipped with 80 packages total, 1.2 ships with 97 the slim USB and 
232 on the big USB.


Well, this was the complete list of packages included with FreeDOS 1.1, all 80 
of them.

BASE\APPENDX
BASE\ASSIGNX
BASE\ATTRIBX
BASE\CDRCACHX
BASE\CHKDSKX
BASE\CHOICEX
BASE\COMMANDX
BASE\COMPX
BASE\CPIDOSX
BASE\CTMOUSEX
BASE\CWSDPMIX
BASE\DEBUGX
BASE\DEFRAG
BASE\DELTREEX
BASE\DEVLOADX
BASE\DISKCPYX
BASE\DISPLAYX
BASE\DOSFSCKX
BASE\DSKCOMPX
BASE\EDITX
BASE\EDLINX
BASE\EXE2BINX
BASE\FASTHLPX
BASE\FCX
BASE\FDAPMX
BASE\FDISKX
BASE\FDPKGX
BASE\FDUPDATX
BASE\FINDX
BASE\FORMATX
BASE\FOURDOSX
BASE\FXMS286X
BASE\GRAPHICX
BASE\HELPX
BASE\HIMEMXX
BASE\INFOZIPX
BASE\INSTALLX
BASE\JEMMEXX
BASE\KERNELX
BASE\KEYBX
BASE\LABELX
BASE\LBACACHX
BASE\LOCALIZX
BASE\MEMX
BASE\MIRRORX
BASE\MODEX
BASE\MOREX
BASE\MOVEX
BASE\MTCPX
BASE\NANSI
BASE\NLSFUNCX
BASE\PRINTQX
BASE\PRINTX
BASE\RECOVERX
BASE\REPLACEX
BASE\RIPCORDX
BASE\SAMCFGX
BASE\SHAREX
BASE\SHSUCDXX
BASE\SORTX
BASE\SUBSTX
BASE\TREEX
BASE\UIDEX
BASE\UNDELX
BASE\UNFMTX
BASE\USBDOSX
BASE\XCOPYX
BASE\XMGRX
BOOT\SYSLNXX
GUI\FDSHELLX
NET\WATTCPX
NET\WGETX
BASE\DOSUTILX
UTIL\BOOTFIXX
UTIL\CALLVERX
UTIL\DOSLFNX
UTIL\FLASHRX
UTIL\FSHIELDX
UTIL\UPXX
UTIL\VMSMNTX

And here is the list of packages on the Large USB Stick. All, 232 of them.

; BASE Packages

archiver\unzip
archiver\zip
base\append
base\assign
base\attrib
base\chkdsk
base\choice
base\command
base\comp
base\cpidos
base\ctmouse
base\debug
base\defrag
base\deltree
base\devload
base\diskcomp
base\diskcopy
base\display
base\dosfsck
base\edit
base\edlin
base\exe2bin
base\fc
base\fdapm
base\fdisk
base\fdxms
base\fdxms286
base\find
base\format
base\help
base\himemx
base\jemm
base\kernel32
base\keyb
base\keyb_lay
base\label
base\lbacache
base\mem
base\mirror
base\mkeyb
base\mode
base\more
base\move
base\nansi
base\nlsfunc
base\print
base\recover
base\replace
base\share
base\shsucdx
base\sort
base\swsubst
base\tree
base\undelete

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS 1.2 Package LSM Data Verification

[Jerome E . Shidel Jr .]

> On May 18, 2016, at 10:12 AM, Tom Ehlert  wrote:
> 
>>> Without DOSLFN, no support at all for long filenames?
> 
>> Correct. Although, I hear the was another very buggy one that was
>> around before DOSLFN. I don’t know the name.
> 
> THIS.IS.RIDICULOUS.
> 
> one of the worst manifestations of Stallmanitis ever.
> 
> bye
> 
> Tom.

Tom,

I understand you may have strong feelings regarding this subject. However, name 
calling, labels, slander, racism and other inflammatory and degrading remarks 
are unacceptable behavior. I have zero tolerance for such games. 

Now, my opinion regarding open source. Could not care less. I have written and 
released Public Domain, Open Source, Freeware, Trialware and Extremely 
Copy-protected software and have every intention of doing so in the future. The 
only type I have not done is Shareware and even that is not do to some moral 
objection. I just don’t think that model works as intended.

For the packages that are to be included with the next OS release, I have been 
given several directives. Among those are that the software package should be 
open source and its sources need to be included. Public domain software is less 
restrictive than open source. So as long as its source is present, it is fine 
that that type of software is included. Other software that places additional 
restrictions on use, do not fit the given requirements. Exceptions may be made. 
But, that decision is not up to me. I have a moral obligation to evaluate all 
of the packages and insure they meet the requirements I was given. 

Is DOSLFN going to be dropped? I don’t know. It is not up to me and my opinion 
is not even relevant. I have not been informed of any decision to do so. The 
problem is its licensing is unclear. There is no licensing information 
contained in its source files or with its binaries. It may be Public Domain. I 
have no idea. 

Freely available source is not Open Source and is not Public Domain. All works 
are Copyright at the moment of their creation. Regardless if it is declared or 
not. However, it is nearly impossible to enforce a Copyright violation without 
said notice. But, would you like to see FreeDOS sued into non-existence do to a 
minor copyright violation?

Now in regards to my original quoted message. If DOSLFN is found to be 
unsuitable, I will not be hunting down an alternative to it.  Someone in either 
the freedos-user or devel group mentioned that there was another program that 
did lfn and it was very buggy. I have no idea what it is called. I have no idea 
if it is buggy. If you would like to find a suitable alternative, it can be 
considered for inclusion.

Jerome


--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS 1.2 Package LSM Data Verification

[Alain Mouette]

Please, beware of  Stallmanitis, it is a serious desease and highly 
contagious.

In the particular case of FreeDOS it bad, at the time of DOS programs 
were free but GPL was not widely known

Alain


On 18-05-2016 11:12, Tom Ehlert wrote:
>>> Without DOSLFN, no support at all for long filenames?
>> Correct. Although, I hear the was another very buggy one that was
>> around before DOSLFN. I don’t know the name.
> THIS.IS.RIDICULOUS.
>
> one of the worst manifestations of Stallmanitis ever.
>
> bye
>
> Tom.
>
>
> --
> Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
> bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
> restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
> apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] JimDOS 1.0

[Tom Ehlert]

>> an operating system without CDROM and network drivers doesn't sound
>> very useful to me, even if everything has the correct license. YMMV.

> I think that the key is to perceive FreeDOS as a replacement to MSDOS,
> nothing else (that is, "BASE").

after 10+ years advertising that FreeDOS is better then MSDOS because
UDMA, LFN, ...

> The legalese on these things can be a
> bit confusing,
the distributor is obviously confused

> so I believe that the extreme caution that FreeDOS
> applies in this area is legitimate.

it is not.

LFNDOS is older then FreeDOS, and comes with a license
'open source. I don't care what you do wit it'

CRYNWR drivers are older then linux. same licensing.

UDMA is one of the drivers that actually made a huge difference on
older motherboards.

to stop delivering these packages suddenly after more then 10 years is
more about this open source religion (Stallmanitis) then anything
about legalese.



Tom


--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS 1.2 Package LSM Data Verification

[Eric Auer]

I would like to agree with Tom: It is good that FreeDOS comes
with a nice collection of drivers for modern hardware! Those
times when a DOS driver was included when people bought their
CD drive have long passed. Also, there are no reasons to limit
our distro to those minimal features of a few MS DOS disks ;-)

>> an operating system without CDROM and network drivers doesn't sound
>> very useful to me, even if everything has the correct license. YMMV.
> 
> I think that the key is to perceive FreeDOS as a replacement to MSDOS, 
> nothing else (that is, "BASE")...

It is good to have a BASE download (probably with "live CD" or
"live USB stick" function, not requiring but allowing install
to other disks) if you want a basic no-nonsense system. Still
I would like to see drivers included even in such a download.

> But then, for actually useful (practical) stuff, one has to rely on a 
> FreeDOS distribution, like Svarog386, or collect the required "non-free" 
> bits by hand over the internet.

It also is good to have a FreeDOS distro which contains a pile
of nice useful free software, if possible fully open source. I
think IBIBLIO also requires open source for the file hosting.

I would NOT want the FreeDOS distro to be limited by extremely
specific license taste. As far as I am concerned, GPL 2 and 3,
MIT, Artistic license, BSD license, public domain etc. are all
perfectly fine for inclusion of packages in our normal distro.

> Otherwise I agree it can get a bit frustrating for actual users,
> and that's the reason I started Svarog386 in the first place.

Looking at your package listing, Svarog386 is quite nice, but we
should not give up the hope of having a nice plain FreeDOS distro.

Jerome, could you make a list of packages which existed in either
FreeDOS 1.0 or 1.1 but are not currently included in 1.2, along
with the reason for exclusion? I think we should indeed be a bit
more generous regarding inclusion of packages! Thanks :-)

Regards, Eric



--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS 1.2 Package LSM Data Verification

[Mateusz Viste]

On 17/05/2016 14:23, Tom Ehlert wrote:
> an operating system without CDROM and network drivers doesn't sound
> very useful to me, even if everything has the correct license. YMMV.

I think that the key is to perceive FreeDOS as a replacement to MSDOS, 
nothing else (that is, "BASE"). The legalese on these things can be a 
bit confusing, so I believe that the extreme caution that FreeDOS 
applies in this area is legitimate.

But then, for actually useful (practical) stuff, one has to rely on a 
FreeDOS distribution, like Svarog386, or collect the required "non-free" 
bits by hand over the internet.

Otherwise I agree it can get a bit frustrating for actual users, and 
that's the reason I started Svarog386 in the first place.

Mateusz


--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] FreeDOS 1.2 Package LSM Data Verification

[Marco Achury]

Please illustrate me:

Define Stallmanitis

El 5/18/2016 a las 9:12 AM, Tom Ehlert escribió:
>>> Without DOSLFN, no support at all for long filenames?
>> Correct. Although, I hear the was another very buggy one that was
>> around before DOSLFN. I don’t know the name.
> THIS.IS.RIDICULOUS.
>
> one of the worst manifestations of Stallmanitis ever.
>
> bye
>
> Tom.
>
>
> --
> Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
> bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
> restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
> apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely restricting. Employees who
bring their own devices (BYOD) to work are irked by the imposition of MDM
restrictions. Mobile Device Manager Plus allows you to control only the
apps on BYO-devices by containerizing them, leaving personal data untouched!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/304595813;131938128;j
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user