Re: [Freedos-devel] Proposition for what a DOS package should be

2019-08-08 Thread Tom Ehlert
>> And I am/was finally aware that PGP is not ported to DOS. > PGP was originally developed for DOS. you are right; and even a current 16-bit binary is available from ftp://ftp.hs-niederrhein.de/pub/pgp/old/dospgp/00index.txt but I still doubt this has been executed often on FreeDOS based syst

Re: [Freedos-devel] Proposition for what a DOS package should be

2019-08-08 Thread Harald Arnesen
Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel [08.08.2019 16:55]: > And I am/was finally aware that PGP is not ported to DOS. PGP was originally developed for DOS. -- Hilsen Harald ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.so

Re: [Freedos-devel] Proposition for what a DOS package should be

2019-08-08 Thread David McMackins
Something related to this that I think should be higher priority for FreeDOS is addressing the fact that many packages rely on proprietary compilers to be built from source. At the very least, it should be possible to build all FreeDOS packages using compilers and assemblers also available in F

Re: [Freedos-devel] Proposition for what a DOS package should be

2019-08-08 Thread Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel
Beside, this is not just a a matter of trust. This is code janitoring. By recompiling programs, we make sure that the programs needed for them are still available. We can make small changes if possible, to make the programs built from more open implementations of C or assembler. Briefly, we

Re: [Freedos-devel] Proposition for what a DOS package should be

2019-08-08 Thread Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel
Thanks Tom Ehlert, to confirm my feeling that most DOS packages have not been rebuilt from source code. We used to trust people because we knew no better way in the past. Well, I was not expecting in any way that the DOS kernel would in any way verify binaries. And I am/was finally aware that