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

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr.  wrote:
>
> And, CURL is now back. It’s sources were located. I also updated it.
> Hopefully, it is not broken.
>
> CURL - Listed as GPL, IT IS NOT GPL! It is less strict and is only
> copyrighted public domain. Included.

Even the official Curl website now points to (IMO, unreliable link)
M.K.'s recent (Dec. 2015) build of 7.46.0 (while latest is 7.49.0).

AFAIK, it is not broken, it supports "SSL SSH" (according to Curl's
download page). I did, minimally, use it once or twice. I could
definitely try it again, that's not hard to do (under QEMU or VBox).

Since Curl (unwisely?) decides to point *directly* to Mik's
(unreliable) webpage, it makes me want to mirror it to iBiblio.
Certainly the (main) license is presumably okay.

The problem is making sure it has all the (third-party source)
dependencies and making sure their licenses are acceptable. Which
unfortunately is hard to do since (AFAIK) rebuilding on or for DOS is
never easy for things like that. Maybe its makefile has improved
lately, but I haven't tried. And without an official "DOS" maintainer,
it's just too hard to guess on our own for every single file.

So it's just uncertain (as are most things that are complicated),
unfortunately. So I can't put any huge confidence in it, but it's
"probably" okay (or no worse than usual, just sloppy, sigh). I'd
really hate to guess blindly or make a mistake in this area.

N.B. I should probably ignore Curl (for now) and focus on CTMOUSE.ZIP
and JEMM.ZIP tomorrow instead. I said I would "fix" those, so I need
to do that, first and foremost.

> I have spent many many many hours fixing broken and incorrect packages. At
> least for now and the foreseeable future, I think I am done fixing them. I
> will be more than happy to include the remainder once they are fixed.

It may be a lost cause. Maybe having tons of third-party packages
included is a bad idea. There probably needs to be a smaller "core" of
FreeDOS that doesn't have all the bells and whistles.

--
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 - UMBPCI

[Don Flowers]

Yes, I see that now, I apologize for the sarcastic tone, I am a bit
frustrated, although I should not be surprised that this licensing phase
should become such a "sticky wicket."

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Eric Auer  wrote:

>
> Hi Don,
>
> >> UMBPCI - Listed as free, No sources, Not Included.
> >
> > http://www.uwe-sieber.de/umbpci_e.html
> >   * Conditions and Download*
> > The original version came from the german magazine c't
> > , but there were several problems and no free
> > updates. This version is based upon the source-code
> >  published by c't in 1995
> which
> > supported only intel chipsets up to the 430FX.
>
> The original version is totally ancient and only supports a rather
> small set of older mainboards.
>
> > It's Freeware.
> >
> > Download:
> > http://www.uwe-sieber.de/files/umbpci_e.zip
> >
> > Source code (TASM 3.x) is available on request.
> >
> > No one in the history of FreeDOS ever bothered to request this source
> code?
>
> The problem is that - as far as I remember! - newer versions of UMBPCI
> contain driver code for modern hardware which required the UMBPCI author
> to agree to not make the details of the hardware totally public. So the
> source code is available on request for individual UMBPCI users, not for
> distribution to everybody who downloads our distro or repository. Please
> correct me if I remember wrongly.
>
> 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
>
--
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 - UMBPCI

[Eric Auer]

Hi Don,

>> UMBPCI - Listed as free, No sources, Not Included.
> 
> http://www.uwe-sieber.de/umbpci_e.html
>   * Conditions and Download*
> The original version came from the german magazine c't
> , but there were several problems and no free
> updates. This version is based upon the source-code
>  published by c't in 1995 which
> supported only intel chipsets up to the 430FX.

The original version is totally ancient and only supports a rather
small set of older mainboards.

> It's Freeware.
> 
> Download:
> http://www.uwe-sieber.de/files/umbpci_e.zip
> 
> Source code (TASM 3.x) is available on request.
> 
> No one in the history of FreeDOS ever bothered to request this source code?

The problem is that - as far as I remember! - newer versions of UMBPCI
contain driver code for modern hardware which required the UMBPCI author
to agree to not make the details of the hardware totally public. So the
source code is available on request for individual UMBPCI users, not for
distribution to everybody who downloads our distro or repository. Please
correct me if I remember wrongly.

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

[Jerome E. Shidel Jr.]

> On May 19, 2016, at 3:55 PM, Louis Santillan  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr.  
> wrote:
> [SNIP]
>> 
>> 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.
> 
> I finally found a(n obvious) term for DOSLFN's situation, License-Free
> Software [0].  This means source is unmarked with license and/or
> copyright info.  And if you believe DJB's judicial reasoning, placing
> the code on the net, demonstrating how to use the software "creates"
> an implied license with similar restrictions to Public Domain software
> 
> Food for thought.
> 
> [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License-free_software 
> 

Sounds good to me.

Thanks

--
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

[perditionc]

Some replies intermixed, on my phone so hopefully readable.

On May 19, 2016 3:33 PM, "Don Flowers"  wrote:
>
> >UMBPCI - Listed as free, No sources, Not Included.
>
> http://www.uwe-sieber.de/umbpci_e.html
>   Conditions and Download
> The original version came from the german magazine c't, but there were
several problems and no free updates. This version is based upon the
source-code published by c't in 1995 which supported only intel chipsets up
to the 430FX.
>
> It's Freeware.
>
> Download:
> http://www.uwe-sieber.de/files/umbpci_e.zip
>
> Source code (TASM 3.x) is available on request.
>
>
> No one in the history of FreeDOS ever bothered to request this source
code?
>

I have in the past, however it is for an older version and if memory serves
it is preferred to retrieve from origin to avoid using outdated version.  I
will eventually ask for an updated version, but we should respect authors
wishes and not make available without explicit permission as as it can
still be obtained from origin.  (I fully believe local mirrors of DOS
software are important as sites disappear all the time)

> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr. 
wrote:
>>
>> Hello Eric and all,
>>
>> First, I went through the couple old 1.1 packages that were not on the
update repo. They were buried elsewhere on ibiblio.
>>
>> So, at present these will be included on big USB but are not currently
installed under ALL or BASE.
>>
>> RIPCORD

This should not be included.  It is specific to defunct ripcord (beta)
releases.  It is public domain (from me).  It included version information
now fully replaced by LSMs in packages.

>> DOSUTIL, also updated  to latest version.
>> SYSLINUX, 4.x, there is a 6.x version available if someone wants to
build it, probably should add this to ALL.
>> FLASHROM
>> FDSHIELD, updated to latest version.
>> CALLVER, probably should add this to base.
>> SAMCFG

Yes this just a sample/documented config.sys file.  It is also public
domain I think (also originated from me - I can't recall if it includes any
copyrighted comments ie examples I borrowed and can't read it currently to
check.)

>>
>>

Thank you for all your work, I know how time consuming it can be.

Jeremy
--
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

[Don Flowers]

This  works best, but requires UMBM.EXE from the last release of UMBPCI and
I don't know what your distro restrictions are
5?DEVICE=C:\FDOS\BIN\UMBM.EXE
5?DEVICE=C:\FDOS\BIN\JEMMEX.EXE X=TEST I=TEST NOVME NOINVLPG FRAME=NONE
DOS=HIGH,UMB
DOSDATA=HIGH
SHELLHIGH=(you get  the idea.)
After everything loads I have 622K + 32MB

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Don Flowers  wrote:

>
> This one works (not perfectly, but doesn't hang) on my 2 least JEMMEX
> friendly machines,
> DEVICE=C:\FDOS\BIN\JEMMEX.EXE NOEMS X=TEST I=TEST NOVME NOINVLPG
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Corbin Davenport  wrote:
>
>> > How are you detecting VBox?
>>
>> I'm using a program called RBPCI
>>  to scan all devices connected
>> to whatever machine the Cobalt setup is running on. During setup, it uses
>> RBPCI to scan for a device with a DeviceID of "BEEF" - which is the
>> VirtualBox display driver.
>>
>> > 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.
>>
>> The biggest culprit I found was Windows 3.x.
>>
>> > File sharing? Good luck! Outside of VMSMOUNT (VMware specific), I'm
>> not aware of any others. Perhaps you can use FTPSRV?
>>
>> Pretty much. I'm hoping something like this guide
>> 
>> will work, and I can configure Cobalt to show the IP address of the server
>> at startup for easily connecting. Also thanks for letting me know about
>> VMSMOUNT, I had no idea that existed!
>>
>> > I would recommend that on  the Boot to command line option, that
>> HIMEMX should replace JEMMEX (two of my computer's are hanging on your
>> JEMMEX config [check our Jerome's command line, it works]), and also bypass
>> blackout and break off so the user can see what is happening. and maybe
>> include DEVLOAD so the CDROM can be loaded after a successful boot to the
>> command line.
>>
>> What JEMMEX config would you think works the best?
>>
>> Corbin 
>>
>> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Don Flowers  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Corbin,
>>> I would recommend that on  the Boot to command line option, that HIMEMX
>>> should replace JEMMEX (two of my computer's are hanging on your JEMMEX
>>> config [check our Jerome's command line, it works]), and also bypass
>>> blackout and break off so the user can see what is happening. and maybe
>>> include DEVLOAD so the CDROM can be loaded after a successful boot to the
>>> command line.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Rugxulo  wrote:
>>>
 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


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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

[Louis Santillan]

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr.  wrote:
[SNIP]
>
> 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.

I finally found a(n obvious) term for DOSLFN's situation, License-Free
Software [0].  This means source is unmarked with license and/or
copyright info.  And if you believe DJB's judicial reasoning, placing
the code on the net, demonstrating how to use the software "creates"
an implied license with similar restrictions to Public Domain software

Food for thought.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License-free_software

--
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

[Don Flowers]

This one works (not perfectly, but doesn't hang) on my 2 least JEMMEX
friendly machines,
DEVICE=C:\FDOS\BIN\JEMMEX.EXE NOEMS X=TEST I=TEST NOVME NOINVLPG

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Corbin Davenport  wrote:

> > How are you detecting VBox?
>
> I'm using a program called RBPCI 
> to scan all devices connected to whatever machine the Cobalt setup is
> running on. During setup, it uses RBPCI to scan for a device with a
> DeviceID of "BEEF" - which is the VirtualBox display driver.
>
> > 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.
>
> The biggest culprit I found was Windows 3.x.
>
> > File sharing? Good luck! Outside of VMSMOUNT (VMware specific), I'm not
> aware of any others. Perhaps you can use FTPSRV?
>
> Pretty much. I'm hoping something like this guide
> 
> will work, and I can configure Cobalt to show the IP address of the server
> at startup for easily connecting. Also thanks for letting me know about
> VMSMOUNT, I had no idea that existed!
>
> > I would recommend that on  the Boot to command line option, that HIMEMX
> should replace JEMMEX (two of my computer's are hanging on your JEMMEX
> config [check our Jerome's command line, it works]), and also bypass
> blackout and break off so the user can see what is happening. and maybe
> include DEVLOAD so the CDROM can be loaded after a successful boot to the
> command line.
>
> What JEMMEX config would you think works the best?
>
> Corbin 
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Don Flowers  wrote:
>
>> Hi Corbin,
>> I would recommend that on  the Boot to command line option, that HIMEMX
>> should replace JEMMEX (two of my computer's are hanging on your JEMMEX
>> config [check our Jerome's command line, it works]), and also bypass
>> blackout and break off so the user can see what is happening. and maybe
>> include DEVLOAD so the CDROM can be loaded after a successful boot to the
>> command line.
>>
>> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Rugxulo  wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 

Re: [Freedos-user] Cobalt OS 1.2

[Corbin Davenport]

> How are you detecting VBox?

I'm using a program called RBPCI 
to scan all devices connected to whatever machine the Cobalt setup is
running on. During setup, it uses RBPCI to scan for a device with a
DeviceID of "BEEF" - which is the VirtualBox display driver.

> 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.

The biggest culprit I found was Windows 3.x.

> File sharing? Good luck! Outside of VMSMOUNT (VMware specific), I'm not
aware of any others. Perhaps you can use FTPSRV?

Pretty much. I'm hoping something like this guide
 will
work, and I can configure Cobalt to show the IP address of the server at
startup for easily connecting. Also thanks for letting me know about
VMSMOUNT, I had no idea that existed!

> I would recommend that on  the Boot to command line option, that HIMEMX
should replace JEMMEX (two of my computer's are hanging on your JEMMEX
config [check our Jerome's command line, it works]), and also bypass
blackout and break off so the user can see what is happening. and maybe
include DEVLOAD so the CDROM can be loaded after a successful boot to the
command line.

What JEMMEX config would you think works the best?

Corbin 

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Don Flowers  wrote:

> Hi Corbin,
> I would recommend that on  the Boot to command line option, that HIMEMX
> should replace JEMMEX (two of my computer's are hanging on your JEMMEX
> config [check our Jerome's command line, it works]), and also bypass
> blackout and break off so the user can see what is happening. and maybe
> include DEVLOAD so the CDROM can be loaded after a successful boot to the
> command line.
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Rugxulo  wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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] FreeDOS 1.2 Package LSM Data Verification

[Don Flowers]

>UMBPCI - Listed as free, No sources, Not Included.

http://www.uwe-sieber.de/umbpci_e.html
  * Conditions and Download*
The original version came from the german magazine c't
, but there were several problems and no free
updates. This version is based upon the source-code
 published by c't in 1995 which
supported only intel chipsets up to the 430FX.

It's Freeware.

Download:
http://www.uwe-sieber.de/files/umbpci_e.zip

Source code (TASM 3.x) is available on request.


No one in the history of FreeDOS ever bothered to request this source code?

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr. 
wrote:

> Hello Eric and all,
>
> First, I went through the couple old 1.1 packages that were not on the
> update repo. They were buried elsewhere on ibiblio.
>
> So, at present these will be included on big USB but are not currently
> installed under ALL or BASE.
>
> RIPCORD
> DOSUTIL, also updated  to latest version.
> SYSLINUX, 4.x, there is a 6.x version available if someone wants to build
> it, probably should add this to ALL.
> FLASHROM
> FDSHIELD, updated to latest version.
> CALLVER, probably should add this to base.
> SAMCFG
>
> UPX had not gone away, it was it the DEVEL group. I just missed seeing it
> when compiling the list.
>
> And, CURL is now back. It’s sources were located. I also updated it.
> Hopefully, it is not broken.
>
> WATTCP is the only one remaining.
>
> I have spent many many many hours fixing broken and incorrect packages. At
> least for now and the foreseeable future, I think I am done fixing them. I
> will be more than happy to include the remainder once they are fixed.
>
> On May 19, 2016, at 1:16 PM, Eric Auer  wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jerome,
>
> Except for the following packages all other dropped and questionable
> packages are listed at the beginning of this thread. This list of
>
>
> Please cite the beginning-of-this-thread snippet, it is a long thread.
>
> 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.
>
>
> Do you mean they were part of the 1.1 distro but not of the 1.1 repo?
>
>
> Yes, however some are elsewhere on ibiblio.
>
>
> DOSUTIL, No sources present in package. Might be buried on repos
>
>
> What is the content of that package?
>
> RIPCORD, FreeDOS release related program, Compatibility not tested.
>
>
> Indeed probably specific to the 1.1 distort.
>
>
> For now, included. I will try it out prior to next release.
>
>
> SAMCFG, I don’t know if it is applicable anymore.
>
>
> Sounds like a sample config, which could be useful to include.
> Of course if you find some settings which are no longer valid
> for updated drivers, it would be cool to update those, but I
> would say that the 1.1 sample config should still be valid :-)
>
> SYSLNX There has to be a newer version, not in repo for 1.1.
>
>
> Syslinux? That sounds pretty important.
>
>
> Probably, someone should really update it.
>
>
> WATTCP, No Source files present
>
>
> http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=wattcp says that would
> be the place to be. The wat2001b.zip indeed does have sources.
>
> CALLVER, FLASHR, SHIELD and UPX not in repo for 1.1
>
>
> Maybe you mean FDSHIELD: www.freedos.org/software/?prog=fdshield
> This does include sources.
>
> http://ericauer.cosmodata.virtuaserver.com.br/soft/specials/ has
> a copy of CALLVER 2007-aug19.zip which includes sourcs.
>
> I am not sure what FLASHR is, maybe a tool to update firmware?
>
> For UPX, the version with UPX-UCL library should be used, because
> it has the more free/libre license compared to the UPX NRV default:
> http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=upx-ucl (a very nice tool!)
>
> 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.
>
>
> This probably means that they got added to the distro after 1.1, in
> the hope that they will be included in the FreeDOS 1.2 distro. The
> users were able to install through the repository in the meantime.
>
> FreeDOS 1.1 shipped with 80 packages total, 1.2 ships with 97 the
> slim USB and 232 on the big USB.
>
>
> That is really cool, thanks :-)
>
> By the way, it is good to have full 8.3 file names for packages now,
> the "X" and "S" distinction in the repo makes it hard to find stuff
> which normally has 8 char names but has to squeeze in the "X" suffix.
>
> Regards, Eric
>
>
>
> Well, this was the complete list of packages included with FreeDOS
> 1.1, all 80 of them.
>
>
> Base: Append Assign Attrib Cdrcach(e) Chkdsk Choice Command Comp
> Cpidos Ctmouse Cwsdpmi Debug Defrag Deltree Devload Diskc(o)py
> Display Dosfsck D(i)skcomp Edit Edlin Exe2bin Fasth(e)lp Fc Fdapm
> Fdisk Fdpkg Fdupdat(e) Find Format Fourdos (4dos) F(d)xms286
> Graphic(s) Help Himemx Infozip Install Jemmex 

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

[Jerome E. Shidel Jr.]

Hello Eric and all,

First, I went through the couple old 1.1 packages that were not on the update 
repo. They were buried elsewhere on ibiblio.

So, at present these will be included on big USB but are not currently 
installed under ALL or BASE.

RIPCORD
DOSUTIL, also updated  to latest version.
SYSLINUX, 4.x, there is a 6.x version available if someone wants to build it, 
probably should add this to ALL.
FLASHROM
FDSHIELD, updated to latest version.
CALLVER, probably should add this to base.
SAMCFG

UPX had not gone away, it was it the DEVEL group. I just missed seeing it when 
compiling the list.

And, CURL is now back. It’s sources were located. I also updated it. Hopefully, 
it is not broken.

WATTCP is the only one remaining. 

I have spent many many many hours fixing broken and incorrect packages. At 
least for now and the foreseeable future, I think I am done fixing them. I will 
be more than happy to include the remainder once they are fixed. 

> On May 19, 2016, at 1:16 PM, Eric Auer  > wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Jerome,
> 
>> Except for the following packages all other dropped and questionable
>> packages are listed at the beginning of this thread. This list of
> 
> Please cite the beginning-of-this-thread snippet, it is a long thread.
> 
>> 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.
> 
> Do you mean they were part of the 1.1 distro but not of the 1.1 repo?

Yes, however some are elsewhere on ibiblio.

> 
>> DOSUTIL, No sources present in package. Might be buried on repos
> 
> What is the content of that package?
> 
>> RIPCORD, FreeDOS release related program, Compatibility not tested.
> 
> Indeed probably specific to the 1.1 distort.

For now, included. I will try it out prior to next release.

> 
>> SAMCFG, I don’t know if it is applicable anymore.
> 
> Sounds like a sample config, which could be useful to include.
> Of course if you find some settings which are no longer valid
> for updated drivers, it would be cool to update those, but I
> would say that the 1.1 sample config should still be valid :-)
> 
>> SYSLNX There has to be a newer version, not in repo for 1.1.
> 
> Syslinux? That sounds pretty important.

Probably, someone should really update it.

> 
>> WATTCP, No Source files present
> 
> http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=wattcp 
>  says that would
> be the place to be. The wat2001b.zip indeed does have sources.
> 
>> CALLVER, FLASHR, SHIELD and UPX not in repo for 1.1
> 
> Maybe you mean FDSHIELD: www.freedos.org/software/?prog=fdshield 
> 
> This does include sources.
> 
> http://ericauer.cosmodata.virtuaserver.com.br/soft/specials/ 
>  has
> a copy of CALLVER 2007-aug19.zip which includes sourcs.
> 
> I am not sure what FLASHR is, maybe a tool to update firmware?
> 
> For UPX, the version with UPX-UCL library should be used, because
> it has the more free/libre license compared to the UPX NRV default:
> http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=upx-ucl 
>  (a very nice tool!)
> 
>> 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.
> 
> This probably means that they got added to the distro after 1.1, in
> the hope that they will be included in the FreeDOS 1.2 distro. The
> users were able to install through the repository in the meantime.
> 
>> FreeDOS 1.1 shipped with 80 packages total, 1.2 ships with 97 the
>> slim USB and 232 on the big USB.
> 
> That is really cool, thanks :-)
> 
> By the way, it is good to have full 8.3 file names for packages now,
> the "X" and "S" distinction in the repo makes it hard to find stuff
> which normally has 8 char names but has to squeeze in the "X" suffix.
> 
> Regards, Eric
> 
> 
> 
>> Well, this was the complete list of packages included with FreeDOS
>> 1.1, all 80 of them.
> 
> Base: Append Assign Attrib Cdrcach(e) Chkdsk Choice Command Comp
> Cpidos Ctmouse Cwsdpmi Debug Defrag Deltree Devload Diskc(o)py
> Display Dosfsck D(i)skcomp Edit Edlin Exe2bin Fasth(e)lp Fc Fdapm
> Fdisk Fdpkg Fdupdat(e) Find Format Fourdos (4dos) F(d)xms286
> Graphic(s) Help Himemx Infozip Install Jemmex Kernel Keyb Label
> Lbacach(e) Localiz(e) Mem Mirror Mode More Move Mtcp Nansi Nlsfunc
> Printq Print Recover Replace Ripcord Samcfg Share Shsucdx Sort
> Subst Tree Uide Undel(ete) Unf(or)m(a)t Usbdos Xcopy Xmgr Dosutil
> 
> Boot: Sysl(i)n(u)x
> 
> GUI: Fdshell (?)
> 
> Net: Wattcp Wget
> 
> Util: Bootfix Callver Doslfn  Flashr Fdshield Upx Vmsmnt
> 
>> And here is the list of packages on the Large USB Stick.
>> All, 232 of them.

This is a repost/updated not included and problem 

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

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jerome,

> Except for the following packages all other dropped and questionable
> packages are listed at the beginning of this thread. This list of

Please cite the beginning-of-this-thread snippet, it is a long thread.

> 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.

Do you mean they were part of the 1.1 distro but not of the 1.1 repo?

> DOSUTIL, No sources present in package. Might be buried on repos

What is the content of that package?

> RIPCORD, FreeDOS release related program, Compatibility not tested.

Indeed probably specific to the 1.1 distro.

> SAMCFG, I don’t know if it is applicable anymore.

Sounds like a sample config, which could be useful to include.
Of course if you find some settings which are no longer valid
for updated drivers, it would be cool to update those, but I
would say that the 1.1 sample config should still be valid :-)

> SYSLNX There has to be a newer version, not in repo for 1.1.

Syslinux? That sounds pretty important.

> WATTCP, No Source files present

http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=wattcp says that would
be the place to be. The wat2001b.zip indeed does have sources.

> CALLVER, FLASHR, SHIELD and UPX not in repo for 1.1

Maybe you mean FDSHIELD: www.freedos.org/software/?prog=fdshield
This does include sources.

http://ericauer.cosmodata.virtuaserver.com.br/soft/specials/ has
a copy of CALLVER 2007-aug19.zip which includes sourcs.

I am not sure what FLASHR is, maybe a tool to update firmware?

For UPX, the version with UPX-UCL library should be used, because
it has the more free/libre license compared to the UPX NRV default:
http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=upx-ucl (a very nice tool!)

> 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.

This probably means that they got added to the distro after 1.1, in
the hope that they will be included in the FreeDOS 1.2 distro. The
users were able to install through the repository in the meantime.

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

That is really cool, thanks :-)

By the way, it is good to have full 8.3 file names for packages now,
the "X" and "S" distinction in the repo makes it hard to find stuff
which normally has 8 char names but has to squeeze in the "X" suffix.

Regards, Eric



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

Base: Append Assign Attrib Cdrcach(e) Chkdsk Choice Command Comp
Cpidos Ctmouse Cwsdpmi Debug Defrag Deltree Devload Diskc(o)py
Display Dosfsck D(i)skcomp Edit Edlin Exe2bin Fasth(e)lp Fc Fdapm
Fdisk Fdpkg Fdupdat(e) Find Format Fourdos (4dos) F(d)xms286
Graphic(s) Help Himemx Infozip Install Jemmex Kernel Keyb Label
Lbacach(e) Localiz(e) Mem Mirror Mode More Move Mtcp Nansi Nlsfunc
Printq Print Recover Replace Ripcord Samcfg Share Shsucdx Sort
Subst Tree Uide Undel(ete) Unf(or)m(a)t Usbdos Xcopy Xmgr Dosutil

Boot: Sysl(i)n(u)x

GUI: Fdshell (?)

Net: Wattcp Wget

Util: Bootfix Callver Doslfn  Flashr Fdshield Upx Vmsmnt

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

[see original mail]


--
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

[Dale E Sterner]

You can call the copyright office and have them do a search (its not
free)
If they don't find anything registered then its pretty much open
season for that software. You have to pay by the hour (labor) for a
search.


DS



On Wed, 18 May 2016 18:22:02 -0400 Jerome E. Shidel Jr.
 writes:
> 
> > 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


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


ABP Tactical
This Pen Could Save Your Life
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/573dc7cede54f47ce78c1st01duc

--
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

[Don Flowers]

Hi Corbin,
I would recommend that on  the Boot to command line option, that HIMEMX
should replace JEMMEX (two of my computer's are hanging on your JEMMEX
config [check our Jerome's command line, it works]), and also bypass
blackout and break off so the user can see what is happening. and maybe
include DEVLOAD so the CDROM can be loaded after a successful boot to the
command line.

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Rugxulo  wrote:

> 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
>
>
--
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