[Freedos-user] FD13 Live CD boot issue from SATA DVD Drive
Dear All, I have downloaded the FD13 Live CD (preview) and tried to boot it on my laptop having a SATA DVD. I set the boot mode to Legacy from the BIOS and FreeDOS boots. However, it does not find and mount the CD as D: It fails with an error message displaying "no drives found". When I boot the same CD on my old IDE DVD, everything works like a charm. I tried to edit FDAUTO.BAT and use GCDROM.SYS and UIDE.SYS instead with no luck. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. -- Robert ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Updates to the FreeDOS website?
Hi, First of all thanks for all your work on FreeDOS. Allow me to give you my opinion regarding aesthetics since I develop websites myself: - Text spans from edge to edge of the screen - It is quite tiring to read especially on a wide screen. Consider limiting the content to a maximum width of 1100px centered. - I would put What's New as the first section - Myself I would be interested in knowing about any updates as soon as I visit the site - The top menu items are too crammed - consider adding some spacing between them - Welcome to FreeDOS section - Consider centering the youtube videos and the *More Videos *button Other than that I like the colours etc. Here are my replies to your questions: >> 1. What is your immediate impression? Does it look easier to find information? Is it more welcoming? Yes it is more welcoming but honestly I like the icons at the footer in the current site. >>2. Imagine you wanted to download the latest version of FreeDOS. Can you figure out what version you need? Can you download the right version? In the download section, I would mention the live cd download option. For me when I realised there is the FD13LiveCD, that is what I downloaded since I like to test on real hardware before installing. >>3. Imagine you're a developer and you want to contribute to FreeDOS in some way. Where would you go first? What information are you looking for? I would go to the Source option at the top but it would be nice to have a contribute link/button. >>4. Imagine you're a new user who wants to try FreeDOS, but you don't have a lot of experience with DOS. You might need help with the commands and getting around. Can you get the help you need to do that? I would go to the Wiki so there should be a section in the wiki about the commands etc... a sort of user manual >>5. Imagine you want to download some games to play on FreeDOS. Where would you go to find games and download them? I would click the Learn More under the game screenshot. That is quite straightforward in my opinion >>6. Imagine you are new to FreeDOS, and you want to know what things you can do with it. Can you figure this out from the front page? Where else would you go? What links would you click on to learn more? Yes I would know immediately from the welcome section and from my experience, if you are looking for FreeDOS, chances are that you are already familiar with DOS. >>7. Imagine you're a developer and you'd like to try out FreeDOS. You're not sure if you should get too invested in something if it's not being updated very frequently. Can you tell if FreeDOS is being updated? By looking at the website, can you figure out if FreeDOS is active, or maybe has been "dead" or "idle" for a few years? The dates in the *what's new* section say it all. Once I see that a package is being actively developed, it means that the project is active. That is why I suggested that this section goes at the top and when a new FreeDOS version is out, it is included in that section maybe with a brighter colour. Hope I answered all your questions as expected. Thanks and regards, Robert On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 23:48, Jim Hall wrote: > > I've started a test version of the website at test.freedos.org and I'd > love your feedback on it! > > > *A few notes:* > > This is a *mock-up* of the new website, and it is a work in progress. You > might see the design change from day to day as I decide to update things. > > It's also *incomplete*. For example, right now the top bar isn't > centered. And you may notice some faint boxes on the main page - such as > around the diagrams and the articles. I'm using these to help me with the > layout; this will be changed to black-on-white in the end. You'll also > notice that sub-pages (links on the website) may land on a plain text > description of what the page will be eventually. But I obviously haven't > tackled those pages yet - and don't plan to until I decide the front page > and general layout has been figured out. > > > If you'd like to help, please answer these questions and scenarios: > > 1. What is your immediate impression? Does it look easier to find > information? Is it more welcoming? > > 2. Imagine you wanted to download the latest version of FreeDOS. Can you > figure out what version you need? Can you download the right version? > > 3. Imagine you're a developer and you want to contribute to FreeDOS in > some way. Where would you go first? What information are you looking for? > > 4. Imagine you're a new user who wants to try FreeDOS, but you don't have > a lot of experience with DOS. You might need help with the commands and > getting around. Can you get the help you need to do that? > > 5. Imagine you want to download some games to play on FreeDOS. Where > would you go to find games and download them? > > 6. Imagine you are new to FreeDOS, and you want to know what things you > can do with it. Can you figure this out from the front page? Where else > would
Re: [Freedos-user] A different approach
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 04:35:07PM -0600, Jim Hall wrote: > > > But I'm always on the lookout for an inexpensive Intel-based hobby system > > that would run FreeDOS. I spoke with an embedded systems company a month > or > > two ago, and they are in development of an Intel embedded board with a > BIOS > > and VGA that will probably be around $100. I'd buy that if they finally > > make it to market. On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 4:58 PM ZB wrote: > Maybe they could "extend it beyond standard"? For example: VGA with > sprites and raster-interrupts. It would be nice to have it available > > I'm sure it's whatever their customer base wants them to have. I contacted them because I saw they were working on the board, and asked them about using it for a hobby system. I was interested in buying just one - but I am sure they have customers who buy these in the hundreds or thousands for embedded systems like display boards, machine control, manufacturing, or whatever. But it runs FreeDOS (he said they are using that for development) so there's that. :-) ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] A different approach
On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 04:35:07PM -0600, Jim Hall wrote: > But I'm always on the lookout for an inexpensive Intel-based hobby system > that would run FreeDOS. I spoke with an embedded systems company a month or > two ago, and they are in development of an Intel embedded board with a BIOS > and VGA that will probably be around $100. I'd buy that if they finally > make it to market. Maybe they could "extend it beyond standard"? For example: VGA with sprites and raster-interrupts. It would be nice to have it available -- regards, Zbigniew ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Updates to the FreeDOS website?
I've started a test version of the website at test.freedos.org and I'd love your feedback on it! *A few notes:* This is a *mock-up* of the new website, and it is a work in progress. You might see the design change from day to day as I decide to update things. It's also *incomplete*. For example, right now the top bar isn't centered. And you may notice some faint boxes on the main page - such as around the diagrams and the articles. I'm using these to help me with the layout; this will be changed to black-on-white in the end. You'll also notice that sub-pages (links on the website) may land on a plain text description of what the page will be eventually. But I obviously haven't tackled those pages yet - and don't plan to until I decide the front page and general layout has been figured out. If you'd like to help, please answer these questions and scenarios: 1. What is your immediate impression? Does it look easier to find information? Is it more welcoming? 2. Imagine you wanted to download the latest version of FreeDOS. Can you figure out what version you need? Can you download the right version? 3. Imagine you're a developer and you want to contribute to FreeDOS in some way. Where would you go first? What information are you looking for? 4. Imagine you're a new user who wants to try FreeDOS, but you don't have a lot of experience with DOS. You might need help with the commands and getting around. Can you get the help you need to do that? 5. Imagine you want to download some games to play on FreeDOS. Where would you go to find games and download them? 6. Imagine you are new to FreeDOS, and you want to know what things you can do with it. Can you figure this out from the front page? Where else would you go? What links would you click on to learn more? 7. Imagine you're a developer and you'd like to try out FreeDOS. You're not sure if you should get too invested in something if it's not being updated very frequently. Can you tell if FreeDOS is being updated? By looking at the website, can you figure out if FreeDOS is active, or maybe has been "dead" or "idle" for a few years? ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] A different approach
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 7:38 AM ZB wrote: > Build mini MSDOS gaming PC - NO EMULATION! PC104 > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBsv-jRiIT8 > > (Using PC/104 components to build a mini 486 MSDOS gaming PC) > > I'd love to have a system like this to experiment with, but the PC/104 modules are just too expensive to really be cost effective as a "hobby" system. Which is really what it would be for me. I don't think I've seen a PC/104 for less than $140. Ideally, it would need to be $99 or less before I'd be ready to buy one. But I'm always on the lookout for an inexpensive Intel-based hobby system that would run FreeDOS. I spoke with an embedded systems company a month or two ago, and they are in development of an Intel embedded board with a BIOS and VGA that will probably be around $100. I'd buy that if they finally make it to market. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] FYI: I'm speaking at FOSDEM'21 this weekend
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:44 PM Jim Hall wrote: > [..] > And there are other "like to have" things that would be great to have in a > FreeDOS "2.0" like an alternative DOS command.com shell. I described that > here long ago, and on the blog - would love to have an expanded > command.com that uses a BASIC-like syntax but still maintains > compatibility with DOS BAT files. At the time, you pointed out that Windows > command.com did something similar to what I proposed - but I don't use > Windows so I wasn't aware of that. > For reference, this is the expanded "BASIC-like" syntax I mentioned in 2018. If any new developers would like to write something new, this would be an interesting challenge: https://freedos-project.blogspot.com/2018/08/expanding-freedos-commandcom.html Summary: Variables As in current DOS batch, variables can store either numerical or string data. Variable names can be of any reasonable length, and can be referenced in uppercase or lowercase. Use SET to assign values to variables, and BASIC's LET to assign values based on arithmetic. LET becomes a superset of SET that also supports arithmetic evaluation. SET A=4 SET DIR=*C:\FDOS\BIN* And surround a variable with % to reference its value: SET A=4 LET A=%A% + 1 ECHO %A% Output Use DOS batch's ECHO to display output instead of BASIC's PRINT: ECHO *Hello world* Tests Support the standard DOS batch programming tests, such as == to test equality, and NOT to negate a test. Add extra constructs to test inequality, greater-than and less-than. One possible solution is to assume simple DOS batch programming IF constructs and use Unix-style brackets for the extra constructs: IF ERRORLEVEL 0 ECHO *Success* IF NOT ERRORLEVEL 0 ECHO *Fail* IF EXIST FILE.TXT ECHO *Exists* And: IF %VALUE%==1 ECHO *Equal* IF NOT %VALUE%==1 ECHO *Not equal* And it makes sense that brackets can be used for equivalent standard evaluation too (for example, EQ for ==). I'm using Fortran-style comparison operators here: IF [ %VALUE% EQ 5 ] ECHO *Equal* IF [ %VALUE% NE 5 ] ECHO *Not equal* IF [ %VALUE% GT 5 ] ECHO *Greater than* IF [ %VALUE% GE 5 ] ECHO *Greater or equal* IF [ %VALUE% LT 5 ] ECHO *Less than* IF [ %VALUE% LE 5 ] ECHO *Less or equal* Looping The FOR statement would need to be extended as a *for-next* loop: FOR N IN 1 TO 10 ECHO %N% NEXT Or as the traditional DOS *for-do* one-line shortcut: FOR N IN 1 TO 10 DO ECHO %N% And add a special IN (…) construct to create an iteration over a set, same as DOS batch: FOR %%N IN (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) DO ECHO %%N FOR %%F IN (*.TXT) DO ECHO %%F Branching Similar to both BASIC and DOS batch, GOTO should continue to use : to mark labels: SET N=1 :LOOP ECHO %N% LET N=%N% + 1 IF [ %N% LT 10 ] GOTO LOOP Comments And of course, comments remain the same from BASIC and DOS batch programming: REM *This is a comment* Execution If you called the BASIC-like "shell" using a special parameter (like /P) then it would be nice for anything else you specify that isn't recognized as a shell statement (assuming other syntax is correct) get treated like an external command. That would make this more like a shell: IF EXIST FILE.TXT *EDIT* FILE.TXT Also other internal constructs for CALL and ERRORLEVEL and SHIFT and PATH, but you get the idea. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] FYI: I'm speaking at FOSDEM'21 this weekend
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:44 PM Jim Hall wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:21 PM tom ehlert wrote: > >> > (and a future "2.0" someday). >> >> I am a bit surprised by this. any news that we all are not aware of? >> >> > > Same as I've said before in the email lists, and elsewhere: > > I want to get "1.3" finally wrapped up, and I'd like to have a "2.0" > someday. The NightDOS folks are working on their updated kernel - if > they can get it working *and* still runs all 16-bit DOS applications, > then we could include that as an alternative kernel for people who (a) have > a more modern system, and (b) opt-in to use it.** > > And there are other "like to have" things that would be great to have in a > FreeDOS "2.0" like an alternative DOS command.com shell. I described that > here long ago, and on the blog - would love to have an expanded > command.com that uses a BASIC-like syntax but still maintains > compatibility with DOS BAT files. At the time, you pointed out that Windows > command.com did something similar to what I proposed - but I don't use > Windows so I wasn't aware of that. > > And "2.0" still needs to be "DOS" so needs to support all 16-bit DOS > applications. And I would want FreeDOS to remain a command-line operating > system. > > > So, no surprises to anyone on this list. > > Jim > > ** But, NightDOS is a long way from being able to do that. The goals of > NightDOS are pretty lofty, so they have a lot of work here. I think it will > be a while before we see that. > My presentation is pre-recorded, and I've uploaded a copy to the FreeDOS YouTube channel (will go "live" after my presentation on Sunday). Here's the video: https://youtu.be/uP77xJA8-4k * 0 to 12 min : my history + some DOS history * 12 min to 27 min : FreeDOS up until "now" * 27 min to 41 min : FreeDOS 1.3 * 41 min to end : FreeDOS "2.0" wish list ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] FYI: I'm speaking at FOSDEM'21 this weekend
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:21 PM tom ehlert wrote: > > (and a future "2.0" someday). > > I am a bit surprised by this. any news that we all are not aware of? > > Same as I've said before in the email lists, and elsewhere: I want to get "1.3" finally wrapped up, and I'd like to have a "2.0" someday. The NightDOS folks are working on their updated kernel - if they can get it working *and* still runs all 16-bit DOS applications, then we could include that as an alternative kernel for people who (a) have a more modern system, and (b) opt-in to use it.** And there are other "like to have" things that would be great to have in a FreeDOS "2.0" like an alternative DOS command.com shell. I described that here long ago, and on the blog - would love to have an expanded command.com that uses a BASIC-like syntax but still maintains compatibility with DOS BAT files. At the time, you pointed out that Windows command.com did something similar to what I proposed - but I don't use Windows so I wasn't aware of that. And "2.0" still needs to be "DOS" so needs to support all 16-bit DOS applications. And I would want FreeDOS to remain a command-line operating system. So, no surprises to anyone on this list. Jim ** But, NightDOS is a long way from being able to do that. The goals of NightDOS are pretty lofty, so they have a lot of work here. I think it will be a while before we see that. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] FYI: I'm speaking at FOSDEM'21 this weekend
> (and a future "2.0" someday). I am a bit surprised by this. any news that we all are not aware of? Tom ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] A different approach
On 3 Feb 2021 at 14:36, ZB wrote: > Build mini MSDOS gaming PC - NO EMULATION! PC104 > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBsv-jRiIT8 > > (Using PC/104 components to build a mini 486 MSDOS gaming PC) He's built a PC-104 soundblaster card for christ sake, and he's using a 486SX CPU = no math coprocessor, even mentioning that in the vid... while the same brand (ICOP) make pretty much the same board with the lovely DMP Vortex86DX, which he fails to mention. I've just dropped a comment to that note under the vid. Such an outrage :-D And such a very nice project. Other than that, the PC-104 feature seems to be somewhat expensive on the embedded motherboards. Especially the ICOP tiny modules are significantly cheaper. No SB Audio though. If you need SB-compatible audio = ISA, perhaps PC-104 is not really so very expensive, compared to the PICMG ISA option, where you need an ISA backplane, and a big chassis etc... Frank ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
