Aitor Santamaria Merino wrote:
I am not interested in this project for the moment, sorry.
(sorry, I rephrase in case I was not correctly understood:
In case my previous sentences could have given the impression that I am
interested at this moment, I am not, sorry!)
Aitor
--
list
Hi,
Something interesting! Now I remember where I took my information from: Undocumented
DOS, the times of NT4 came later, I guess ;-))
Aitor
On Wed, 2002-12-04 at 10:34, Aitor Santamaria Merino wrote:
And I'll admit that I don't know much of the internal structure of NT,
but I'm pretty
Minix is based on a microkernel architecture. Linux uses a monolithic kernel
instead - and this inherent difference of architecture caused that by now
well known fall-out between Tannenbaum and Torwalds, remember? No wonder
thus that when in March 1994 version 1.0 was presented at the University
Hi,
Jensen, Gerard wrote:
Has anyone tried GNU-Mach and GNU-Hurd?
At a version level of 0.2?
A pitty ;-)
NT is microkernel too, in my understanding it's a little advantage over
Linux at this moment (?).
Woah, hang on: NT uses a modified microkernel. Process Manager and Virtual
Memory
Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
X-Comment-To: Aitor Santamaria Merino
Hi!
4-äÅË-2002 13:15 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aitor Santamaria Merino) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
ASM NT is microkernel too, in my understanding it's a little advantage over
ASM Linux at this moment (?).
This (NT is microkernel
Simon Waite wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:55:26PM +0100, Jensen, Gerard said this:
Linux is a rewrite of BSD.
No, Linux is rewrite of Minix.
[snip]
No, Linux is a bit more than just a rewrite of Minix... ;-))
Or would you call OS/2 a rewrite of Windows 3.0?
No, I'd call NT a
Eric Auer wrote:
OS/2 became a full-blown OS with a GUI around 1994, and it feels like a
logical extension of DOS, adding GUI and multitasking. In 1994/1995, it
was unclear whether OS/2 (better design) or Windows 95 (better marketing)
would win the market. Things went horribly wrong, so almost
Eric Auer wrote:
Hi Aitor,
you did not get the point...
when you zip 100 files that are the same, the zip will be
100 times some size. However, when you use an UNCOMPRESSED
zip, then the file will basically contain 100 times the same
data structure. TAR is in principle the same as an
tom ehlert wrote:
One could at least think of having multiple console drivers residing
concurrently in a system, say CO80: and BW80: connected to different
video systems and screens, and CON dynamically assigned
one can *always* think of something, that would break something else.
but with
Matthias Paul wrote:
DEVICE=DISPLAY.SYS co80:=(ega,437,(6,3))
DEVICE=DISPLAY.SYS bw80:=(mono,(437,161),0)
Interesting... understood. Well, this means that if a user makes a
mistake like:
DISPLAY CONN=(EGA,437,(6,3))
then it won't prevent DISPLAY from loading, but it won't work ;-)
The : I
Hi,
For a time now, I decided to branch the keyboard layout production from
the xkeyb driver coding, so that Henrique Peron, which has been helping
me with the layouts for some time, can update the layouts at his own
rythm, without the need to wait for a new version of the driver.
Everything
Wouldn't this be/use cygwin, mingw (or was it mingv) and friends?
Florian Xaver wrote:
Hi!
(I am not sure if FreeDOS supports files
of 2 GB yet,
The DJGPP team are working on a WinXP compatible DJGPP
lib/compiler,which (if i remember right) will also support files
bigger than 2GB under
But=- FD.EXE could be made by RAR.EXE, and self extract into any 16
bit
dos directory, or maybe even a floppy. You seen the drdos 7.03
install?It is, by far, the fastest of all of the above.
I don't think plain unpacking will upgrade the boot sector, as required
by the install disk.
Since
Hi,
=
Actually, Michal and I are working on creating new .CPI files
from scratch (to be used under *any* system supporting .CPI files,
including DR-DOS, PTS-DOS, MS-DOS OEM issues, Arabic/Hebrew issues
of MS-DOS, OS/2 and Windows NT/2000/XP), so you can include and
exclude codepages as you
14 matches
Mail list logo
