Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
At 02:20 PM 7/24/2006 +0200, Japeth wrote: >I was advised (thanks Eric!) that there exists a "SB" option for FD-Emm386. >Setting this option indeed cures the SB MPU issues for the protected-mode >games I tried. The SB option is easily the goofiest option I've added to any program I've worked on in the past (I'll be kind) five years. SB drivers would redirect an INT 3 vector to a 1ah error code GPF exception trigger. The drivers directly detected and twiddled the existing IDT to accomplish the feat. Why, I don't know. Some sort of anti-debugger trap perhaps, or maybe a hook for an SB extension if present? Anyway, when the SB option is active, the EMM386 monitor detects GPF's with a 1ah error code and reconverts them to an INT 3 by placing the INT 3 call on the stack, jumping back into the EMM386 interrupt handler so that the INT 3 is processed properly, then returning to the original program past the INT 3 opcode. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Jack gets easily offended, and can't deal with any criticism, even when it's not meant to be offensive. That's why he requested that his programs not be associated with FreeDOS. On 7/24/06, John Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 09:36:33AM -0500, Jim Hall wrote: > > ... But unfortunately, Jack felt there was a personality > > conflict with others on the project, and he chose to make his software > > non-free, both in terms of source code and in terms of its use. Jack > > specifically requested/insisted his programs not be used by the FreeDOS > > Project. > > > > -- > > I'm sorry my president's an idiot. I didn't vote for him. > > I don't know the situation with Jack, but perhaps you > would have more luck getting along with developers if you > left your political views at political venues. There's a > time and a place for everthing. > > -- > Why is a person who plays the piano called a pianist but a > person who drives a racecar not called a racist? > > Have a great day and don't forget to laugh! > > http://www.gcfl.net (The Good, Clean Funnies List): Good, > clean daily funnies you can safely tell your Mom! > > - > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > ___ > Freedos-user mailing list > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user > -- Fall is my favorite season in Los Angeles, watching the birds change color and fall from the trees. David Letterman (1947 - ) See ya - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 09:36:33AM -0500, Jim Hall wrote: > ... But unfortunately, Jack felt there was a personality > conflict with others on the project, and he chose to make his software > non-free, both in terms of source code and in terms of its use. Jack > specifically requested/insisted his programs not be used by the FreeDOS > Project. > > -- > I'm sorry my president's an idiot. I didn't vote for him. I don't know the situation with Jack, but perhaps you would have more luck getting along with developers if you left your political views at political venues. There's a time and a place for everthing. -- Why is a person who plays the piano called a pianist but a person who drives a racecar not called a racist? Have a great day and don't forget to laugh! http://www.gcfl.net (The Good, Clean Funnies List): Good, clean daily funnies you can safely tell your Mom! - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Kenneth J. Davis wrote: > Norbert Remmel wrote: > > ... > >> And I think none of you will say that qhimem is a bad product and >> because of this Jack's memory manager has the right to be a part of >> freedos, again, closed source or not. That really doesn't matter. >> > ... > > The flamewar aside I wanted to make a correction to this; > Jack himself requested his programs not be part of FreeDOS; it just so > happens that his earlier ones with sources are under a license that > allows them to continue to be distributed anyway. The other major issue > is that for all FreeDOS programs,utilities,etc. source is a very > important component; I mean there are tons of good to excellent DOS > programs out there, but without source or permission to include they do > not belong as a part of FreeDOS [the distribution, not the community]. > So regardless of technical merit or not, it really does matter. Absolutely correct. Over time (by which I mean "since 1994") we've dropped a few packages from the FreeDOS distribution because we've decided the license wasn't compatible with the goals of the FreeDOS Project: "FreeDOS aims to be a complete, free, 100% MS-DOS compatible operating system ... While there are many free operating systems out there, no other free DOS-compatible operating system exists." The key word in that statement is "free". It's part of our name. The other key phrase is "free DOS-compatible operating system". The DOS software that we include in the FreeDOS distribution needs to be freely available to all. To help meet that goal, we prefer open-source software. We tend not to use closed-source applications, unless they are also available to all and have no other restrictions on their use. Jack wrote some very nice code in his programs .. as a developer, I have a high level of respect for him. Honestly, I wish Jack the best of luck in what he does. But unfortunately, Jack felt there was a personality conflict with others on the project, and he chose to make his software non-free, both in terms of source code and in terms of its use. Jack specifically requested/insisted his programs not be used by the FreeDOS Project. We can continue using the programs he released under the GNU GPL, but we cannot use his "Q" drivers because those are closed to us. -jh -- I'm sorry my president's an idiot. I didn't vote for him. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Florian Xaver wrote: > [...] > Btw (2): @Jim: > > Have you thought about FreeDOS announcement? Maybe a small interview and > a little discussion about other software would be a good idea, too. E.g. > some words about HX extender (f.e. Windows version of QEMU runs in DOS) > or Mpxplay (Plays even ogg, wma etc.). The online newspapers will copy > your announcement text, so it should be more than just "FreeDOS 1.0 > released"!! > Actually, I have an interview sort of lined up with slashdot (via NewsForge) when we make the "1.0" release. :-) -- I'm sorry my president's an idiot. I didn't vote for him. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Norbert Remmel wrote: ... > And I think none of you will say that qhimem is a bad product and > because of this Jack's memory manager has the right to be a part of > freedos, again, closed source or not. That really doesn't matter. ... The flamewar aside I wanted to make a correction to this; Jack himself requested his programs not be part of FreeDOS; it just so happens that his earlier ones with sources are under a license that allows them to continue to be distributed anyway. The other major issue is that for all FreeDOS programs,utilities,etc. source is a very important component; I mean there are tons of good to excellent DOS programs out there, but without source or permission to include they do not belong as a part of FreeDOS [the distribution, not the community]. So regardless of technical merit or not, it really does matter. Jeremy - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
> > Without a true SB card, I can't duplicate the problem, but I would strongly > bet against the Windows-introduced and flavored GEMMIS being used in any > meaningful (or at least critical) manner by DOS4G -- or any other DOS > extender of notable popularity. Function 4a15h is much more likely, > although until two weeks ago I had never verified that anyone actually used > the function on a live application. It would be pretty easy to test DOS4G, > however. Run a DOS4G application under a debugger, trap the int 2fh > interface, and breakpoint on condition ax=4a15h. Unfortunately, I believe > this approach will not work here in the absence of a SB card, since card > detection and branch past unsupported code likely occurs prior to any I/O > permission setup via 4a15h. > I was advised (thanks Eric!) that there exists a "SB" option for FD-Emm386. Setting this option indeed cures the SB MPU issues for the protected-mode games I tried. So the int 2f, ax=4a15 interface obviously is not used, and from how it is designed it may be restricted to emulate hardware for real-mode apps only. OTOH, the SB drivers work for any kind of apps (if they *do* work). - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Hi Norbert, Japheth, Michael, nice to hear that we are getting back to a productive atmosphere on the list :-). > Not right, because as a normal user you don't have to care about the > chipset you are using, because UMBPCI automatically checks and only > gives a message if an unsupported one is found. My point was that UMBPCI only supports known chipsets while EMM386 has the potential to support all 386+ hardware... But yes, UMBPCI knows many chipsets already. >> The only advantage of QHIMEM is that it uses even less DOS memory. > I think the problem is not the himem part. I believe that all problems > refer to the emm386 portion. Then the whole flaming would not have been necessary :-(. It is NOT HIMEM which is worse than QHIMEM, but it is EMM386 which is worse than UMBPCI! Actually EMM386 is a very complex piece of software, so as long as you have UMBPCI-compatible hardware, it is quite possible that it has advantages to use it instead of EMM386, to avoid the extra complexity overhead. Only problem is that UMBPCI does not provide EMS and that UMBPCI sometimes provides slow and/or un-DMA-able UMB memory. >> http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/dos/command/0.84pre/ >>testing/command.com > Thanks for the url. I will do testing with this release. Thanks :-). > QDMA also doesn't work with Symantec Ghost when used on a SATA-System > in IDE emulation mode by BIOS. This depends on whether "emulation mode" is supposed to work at all. If you can select another mode which does work, then there is no real need to make QDMA support "emulation mode". But of course I would like it if QDMA would not freeze the sound IRQ/DMA handling of Win3.1 standard mode any more :-). Eric - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Hi Eric, at first thanks a lot for your answer. Eric Auer schrieb: > Hi all, > > my excuses for the length of this mail. I hope at least > Norbert and Blair will read all of it :-). I read all of it ;-) > For all the rest, the summary is: There is less poison in > the community than you think. HIMEM and EMM386 are better > than you think but improving them is a good thing. I never wanted to say, that there's nothing good about Michael's memory management apllication. I only wanted to underline that it is unusable at the moment for me, because it crashes a lot on different types of hardware. But as I already answered in my other posting I'm going to take the time and test his newest releases in corporate environment and give detailled error reports. > [...] > Sorry for the miscommunication about the FreeCOM / diskimage > issue, Norbert. Explicit and detailled bug reports are > better than blaming people for bugs in general. Right, I never give bug reports to blame somoeone. My intention is only to make the software better. And that really has nothing to do with personal flamewar. >[...] >> When reading the messages in developer mailing list, I'm wondering about >> where FreeDOS is moving. The developers are only blaming each other >> whole time. There's no normal discussion possible... > > This is not true. You just read the mailing list at the one moment > when a flamewar about qhimem was going on. You are right. But flamewar about qhimem is as old as time. But why?!? Different people always have different opinions. That's life. And everyone of you has to respect this. And I think none of you will say that qhimem is a bad product and because of this Jack's memory manager has the right to be a part of freedos, again, closed source or not. That really doesn't matter. >> Why always discuss things off-list? Has the rest of the dos >> community no right to see what's going on in the development of the >> software they are using? > > Honestly, I think the rest of the dos community does not say > anything at all, not even off-list. For example nobody writes > mail about my cache, neither on-list nor off-list, probably > because the cache has been working well enough recently :-). > So it is not the case that we use the list only for flamewars > and discuss all improvements off-list :-). You should also > visit the IRC if you are interested in the latest distro news > and gossip ;-). No access to irc on work, sorry. But I really would like to do so. >> Even if Johnson told wrong facts in the field of programming, I must say >> that Michael Devore is the wrong man to judge this. It's a fact that his >> himem and emm386 clones are absolutely useless in a productive >> environment. There are too many bugs concerning different types of >> hardware and freedos very often crashes when using emm386. Using Jack R. >> Ellis qhimem and Uwe Sieber's umbpci is the only way to use Freedos with >> UMBs on nearly all kinds of harware by always using the same settings. > > Very harsh words about FreeDOS HIMEM / EMM386. I know, but that's what I expected to hear and that was my intention. Perhaps it is a good thing to have competition back between qhimem and himem-emm386. But please in another way than always saying "stupid piece of software"! > I think I deleted > MS HIMEM and MS EMM386 a year ago because the FreeDOS versions > were actually BETTER than the MS DOS 6.xx ones for me! They have > smaller memory footprint and work better with modern hardware... > On some hardware, UMBPCI has better performance and/or stability > than EMM386. But for example on my test PC, UMBs created by UMBPCI > are "slow memory", and loading CPU-intensive stuff like a cache to > that area makes the whole thing slow. UMBPCI also depends on having > exact knowledge about your particular mainboard chipset, ... Not right, because as a normal user you don't have to care about the chipset you are using, because UMBPCI automatically checks and only gives a message if an unsupported one is found. > ... while > EMM386 should work on all 386 and newer systems. Problems with > EMM386 are usually caused by incompatible BIOSes. You should test > if MS DOS EMM386 works with those BIOSes. If yes, please report. > If no, you cannot blame EMM386 - you are then simply stuck in a > situation where no protected mode based UMB providers work, and > where you have to revert to the real mode driver UMBPCI (which > cannot provide EMS, but most DOS programs do not need EMS...). I can remember that emm386 didn't work on a intel based board with 845g chipset while the microsoft product did. But I give it another try this week. > [...] >> [qhimem] is without any doubt the better and more reliable product >> for everydays use even if there are some features missing. > > Did you try the FreeDOS memory managers in their newest versions? > Yes there were problems with EMM386 about VDS / SCSI / SATA in the > past, but at least HIMEM has been wor
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Michael Devore schrieb: > As a matter for record, since it's been incorrectly reported twice now: > FreeDOS, HIMEM, and EMM386 work fine with Doom. It was one of the first > tests of VCPI support and is often checked against as a baseline. There > are no known applications which fail under FreeDOS HIMEM or EMM386 with the > FreeDOS kernel and which work with Microsoft or other version memory > managers under the FreeDOS kernel. I will have a test this week, because I have not tested you newest releases yet. But as a matter of fact I can say, that all previous releases had enormous problems on different kinds of hardware. > The rest of the original post is even less accurate. Unfortunately , I did > expect off-list marshalling of "allies" for further posts and personal > attacks, which has come to pass. It's a sad situation: no winners, we all > lose from this behavior. Yes, you are right. And that is why I posted my message in this offensive way. I hope this will help to get back to a normal way of discussion. Put Johnson back on list and let him post his opinions. If you don't like what he is saying then there's no need for you to answer. But give others the possibility to take part at the discussion if they want to. That won't affect Freedos in any bad manner. > As promised, I won't respond further other than to clear up direct > misstatements of fact that confuse FreeDOS users into believing something > doesn't work when it does. I will take the time and probe you memory management application on many different types of intel based hardware this week and will give detailed report, promised. Regards Norbert. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
At 07:56 AM 7/24/2006 +0200, Japheth wrote: > > But: DOOM does work with the current himem/emm386. > >As for me this is true for the newest versions of himem/emm386 (July 2006) >only. In fact, any DOS4G application didn't work with FD-Emm386 previously >because my machine has 768 MB. Generally speaking, for PC environments it was not quite as simple as large free memory. Professional DOS4G-bound applications (the far more common DOS/4GW never exhibited the problem as best as I can determine) did work with high free memory in earlier versions on tested environments. For them, it was a matter of specific VCPI/XMS/EMS/raw memory configuration as to when failure would occur. If large memory amounts were sufficient to trigger problems with DOS4G there, detection of the error almost certainly would happened much earlier. >And "do work" doesn't mean "works well". For example, the MIDI music >played in >Doom sounds "strange" with FD-EMM386 on my SB-Live card. > My guess is that this >is due to missing interfaces in Emm386 (apart from the obscure GEMMIS >interface), for example the documented "I/O trapping" interface (int 2Fh, >ax=4A15h). Without a true SB card, I can't duplicate the problem, but I would strongly bet against the Windows-introduced and flavored GEMMIS being used in any meaningful (or at least critical) manner by DOS4G -- or any other DOS extender of notable popularity. Function 4a15h is much more likely, although until two weeks ago I had never verified that anyone actually used the function on a live application. It would be pretty easy to test DOS4G, however. Run a DOS4G application under a debugger, trap the int 2fh interface, and breakpoint on condition ax=4a15h. Unfortunately, I believe this approach will not work here in the absence of a SB card, since card detection and branch past unsupported code likely occurs prior to any I/O permission setup via 4a15h. Your comments raise an important point that is often understressed by developers to endusers. FreeDOS's health depends upon the type of feedback as you have recently provided. It is critical for all users to understand that until a problem they are having is reported and duplicated in a testable environment, it effectively cannot and does not exist with respect to correcting the situation. All current memory manager work has been tracking application incompatibilities via Bugzilla, e-mail, and list, then mitigating any which are found by suggesting user corrections to initial setups (common); making the memory managers work around bugs in applications themselves (infrequent); extending API support (occasional); or fixing actual bugs (fairly rare). When there are no pending verified bug reports, no further development gets done. Already, this has happened for multiple-month stretches at a time. There have not been any major feature enhancements for over a year on any memory managers -- probably closer to two years. Major feature work is complete. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
> But: DOOM does work with the current himem/emm386. As for me this is true for the newest versions of himem/emm386 (July 2006) only. In fact, any DOS4G application didn't work with FD-Emm386 previously because my machine has 768 MB. And "do work" doesn't mean "works well". For example, the MIDI music played in Doom sounds "strange" with FD-EMM386 on my SB-Live card. My guess is that this is due to missing interfaces in Emm386 (apart from the obscure GEMMIS interface), for example the documented "I/O trapping" interface (int 2Fh, ax=4A15h). - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Hi, I see a future of FreeDOS, also behind version 1.0. I have been using latest HIMEM every day and haven't any problem. Also LBACACHE works very good ;-) I am downloading the latest test version of Freecom now. If I find an error, you will read my bug report :-) Bad think is, that I have only 64kBIT internet connection. So I haven't latest test release of FreeDOS 1.0. But this will change. Thanks to all developers! Btw: Although I don't develope FreeDOS tools, I am testing it. And I will release a new oZone version with an improved "explorer" and maybe a new skin when FreeDOS 1.0 will be released. And - I am testing oZone in FreeDOS, Enhanced Dr-DOS AND Windows ;-) Btw (2): @Jim: Have you thought about FreeDOS announcement? Maybe a small interview and a little discussion about other software would be a good idea, too. E.g. some words about HX extender (f.e. Windows version of QEMU runs in DOS) or Mpxplay (Plays even ogg, wma etc.). The online newspapers will copy your announcement text, so it should be more than just "FreeDOS 1.0 released"!! Bye Flo - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Hi all, my excuses for the length of this mail. I hope at least Norbert and Blair will read all of it :-). The other readers of the "EMM386 2.11" thread might want to join ;-) For all the rest, the summary is: There is less poison in the community than you think. HIMEM and EMM386 are better than you think but improving them is a good thing. There is a FreeCOM update available (newer than our ISO). The list is quiet because Blair etc are processing 1.0 devel things behind the scenes, but not "behind the scenes to keep the community from enjoying the development". QHIMEM has some "undocumented" extra features. DOOM works with HIMEM, too. The "don't complain" sentence in the EMM386 docs is years old and from Tom, not from Michael. Sorry for the miscommunication about the FreeCOM / diskimage issue, Norbert. Explicit and detailled bug reports are better than blaming people for bugs in general. Please stop reading here if you only want to get an overview. Well, do not forget to browse the text below a bit anyway, to find the new FreeCOM download URL ;-). > When reading the messages in developer mailing list, I'm wondering about > where FreeDOS is moving. The developers are only blaming each other > whole time. There's no normal discussion possible... This is not true. You just read the mailing list at the one moment when a flamewar about qhimem was going on. > Why always discuss things off-list? Has the rest of the dos > community no right to see what's going on in the development of the > software they are using? Honestly, I think the rest of the dos community does not say anything at all, not even off-list. For example nobody writes mail about my cache, neither on-list nor off-list, probably because the cache has been working well enough recently :-). So it is not the case that we use the list only for flamewars and discuss all improvements off-list :-). You should also visit the IRC if you are interested in the latest distro news and gossip ;-). > Even if Johnson told wrong facts in the field of programming, I must say > that Michael Devore is the wrong man to judge this. It's a fact that his > himem and emm386 clones are absolutely useless in a productive > environment. There are too many bugs concerning different types of > hardware and freedos very often crashes when using emm386. Using Jack R. > Ellis qhimem and Uwe Sieber's umbpci is the only way to use Freedos with > UMBs on nearly all kinds of harware by always using the same settings. Very harsh words about FreeDOS HIMEM / EMM386. I think I deleted MS HIMEM and MS EMM386 a year ago because the FreeDOS versions were actually BETTER than the MS DOS 6.xx ones for me! They have smaller memory footprint and work better with modern hardware... On some hardware, UMBPCI has better performance and/or stability than EMM386. But for example on my test PC, UMBs created by UMBPCI are "slow memory", and loading CPU-intensive stuff like a cache to that area makes the whole thing slow. UMBPCI also depends on having exact knowledge about your particular mainboard chipset, while EMM386 should work on all 386 and newer systems. Problems with EMM386 are usually caused by incompatible BIOSes. You should test if MS DOS EMM386 works with those BIOSes. If yes, please report. If no, you cannot blame EMM386 - you are then simply stuck in a situation where no protected mode based UMB providers work, and where you have to revert to the real mode driver UMBPCI (which cannot provide EMS, but most DOS programs do not need EMS...). Later I installed the MS versions again for testing purposes with Windows, but again found that Win3.1 works better with FD HIMEM :). Notice that 386 enh mode of Win3.1 and WfW3.11 only works with MS EMM386, but that all Win 3.x versions come with MS EMM386 on the Win 3.x install diskettes anyway. The background is that the heavy tweaks of 386 mode to make DOS "true multitasking" include replacing the whole emm386 "on the fly" with a built-in driver of the Windows kernel, which requires a complex interface called GEMMIS. Nothing else apart from Windows uses GEMMIS, and because of this, FreeDOS EMM386 does not include GEMMIS. > [qhimem] is without any doubt the better and more reliable product > for everydays use even if there are some features missing. Did you try the FreeDOS memory managers in their newest versions? Yes there were problems with EMM386 about VDS / SCSI / SATA in the past, but at least HIMEM has been working fine for me for a long time. The only advantage of QHIMEM is that it uses even less DOS memory. As Jack does not reveal his sources, it is hard to tell which other advantages ought to exist. I hear that he has "allow an IRQ window after every move of a few (2? 4? 8?) kilobytes of XMS", to improve realtime handling, but I doubt that this is actually relevant unless you have a gbit ethernet card on a 486...? > The worst thing is that Michael doesn't care about bug reports from the > dos users
Re: [Freedos-user] Freedos Future
As a matter for record, since it's been incorrectly reported twice now: FreeDOS, HIMEM, and EMM386 work fine with Doom. It was one of the first tests of VCPI support and is often checked against as a baseline. There are no known applications which fail under FreeDOS HIMEM or EMM386 with the FreeDOS kernel and which work with Microsoft or other version memory managers under the FreeDOS kernel. The rest of the original post is even less accurate. Unfortunately , I did expect off-list marshalling of "allies" for further posts and personal attacks, which has come to pass. It's a sad situation: no winners, we all lose from this behavior. As promised, I won't respond further other than to clear up direct misstatements of fact that confuse FreeDOS users into believing something doesn't work when it does. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Freedos Future
Hi, When reading the messages in developer mailing list, I'm wondering about where FreeDOS is moving. The developers are only blaming each other whole time. There's no normal discussion possible. "If you say something wrong than I'll kick your ass off the mailing list!". That's just kidding. Why always discuss things off-list? Has the rest of the dos community no right to see what's going on in the development of the software they are using? Even if Johnson told wrong facts in the field of programming, I must say that Michael Devore is the wrong man to judge this. It's a fact that his himem and emm386 clones are absolutely useless in a productive environment. There are too many bugs concerning different types of hardware and freedos very often crashes when using emm386. Using Jack R. Ellis qhimem and Uwe Sieber's umbpci is the only way to use Freedos with UMBs on nearly all kinds of harware by always using the same settings. It's o.k. to ask why Jack is not going to give his sources to the freedos community, but this is up to him. If he doesn't want other people to have a look at qhimem code than it is allright. But his memory manager is without any doubt the better and more reliable product for everydays use even if there are some features missing. The worst thing is that Michael doesn't care about bug reports from the dos users that have problems running things like doom. But what does he say in his emm386 help file: "IF IT WORKS FOR YOU - FINE. IF IT DOESN'T - STOP USING, BUT DON'T COMPLAIN." You're all talking about the upcoming 1.0 release. And I made my contribution to get rid of bugs. But no one cares. Since I discovered the bug introduced in command.com 0.84pre2 that redirection of ouput to a file isn't possible anymore I hear nothing. I sent different floppy images to Blair and Eric to reproduce the bug but nothing happens. Statement from Blair: "I can't reproduce the bug by using qemu". Statement from Eric: "I won't open any images at the moment". Was it this hard to say: "Oh yes, you're right. I'm working on this." or is it Blair's last crusade to push Freedos to level 1.0 whatever will happen? Did you ever try your own software without using an emulated environment like qemu which is still in beta state and additionally not able to reflect different hardware? I know you have all spent a lot of your freetime at programming code for the freedos community and everyone using freedos won't forget. But I think freedos development has come to an end. The euphoric mood of the last weeks about the upcoming 1.0 release is getting less and less as you can see by reading the postings on the list. If the remaining developers still want to give release 1.0 a chance they should discuss things in a more better way. Let's see where the project leads. And if you are all angry now, you can kick my ass off the list. Norbert. Viel oder wenig? Schnell oder langsam? Unbegrenzt surfen + telefonieren ohne Zeit- und Volumenbegrenzung? DAS TOP ANGEBOT JETZT bei Arcor: günstig und schnell mit DSL - das All-Inclusive-Paket für clevere Doppel-Sparer, nur 44,85 inkl. DSL- und ISDN-Grundgebühr! http://www.arcor.de/rd/emf-dsl-2 - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
