I guess we were all at this point at some time or other.when we
thought we had a brilliant idea and then realised that our plans were
more than just a little fanciful. I spent the best part of 1992 and
1993 writing a rather fancy GUI library that worked on EGA, VGA, a
weird-arse 512K Realtek SVGA
On Sat, 14 Dec 2024, Ben Collver via Freedos-devel wrote:
Thanks for the explanation. Reminds me of folks who made grand plans
for programming projects and perhaps wrote some scaffolding code, but
never finished anything. A whole new GUI or multitasking system built
on top of DOS would be gr
On Sat, 14 Dec 2024, Steve Nickolas via Freedos-devel wrote:
> But this whole thing I've seen about people trying to turn FreeDOS
> into a modern OS with a GUI, multitasking and native AMD64
> support and failing because they can barely write hello world...it's
> because they've got stars in their
ah ok ok ill do that then~ thanks for the info! 💛️
On Sat, 2024-12-14 at 16:45 +0100, Danilo Pecher via Freedos-devel
wrote:
> Dflat+ is a dos text mode library that is styled to mimick the
> Microsoft windows API.
>
> Some info can be found here :
> https://pushbx.org/ecm/editsrc/DOC/DFLATP/DFP10
On Sat, 14 Dec 2024, Ben Collver via Freedos-devel wrote:
A lot of FreeDOS novices seem to want to turn it into Linux, the same
way a lot of Linux novices seem to want to turn it into Windows - and
I think it probably galls some of the old-timers here.
Seems to me there is an old tradition of
On Sun, 15 Dec 2024, tom ehlert via Freedos-devel wrote:
Hallo Herr Steve Nickolas via Freedos-devel,
am Sonntag, 15. Dezember 2024 um 01:09 schrieben Sie:
Also for what it's worth, if Microsoft ever opens the 5.0 sources (this isn't a
non-zero chance) that may be enough to use its version
> A lot of FreeDOS novices seem to want to turn it into Linux, the same
> way a lot of Linux novices seem to want to turn it into Windows - and
> I think it probably galls some of the old-timers here.
Seems to me there is an old tradition of trying to turn DOS into Unix that
predates even MS-DOS
Hallo Herr Steve Nickolas via Freedos-devel,
am Sonntag, 15. Dezember 2024 um 01:09 schrieben Sie:
> Also for what it's worth, if Microsoft ever opens the 5.0 sources (this isn't
> a non-zero chance) that may be enough to use its version of command.com in
> lieu of FreeCOM. 4.01's isn't enoug
Danilo,
> Tom, what's the joke with the references to Linux?
Not Linux specifically. ANY decent interpreter ready to be ported would do.
I just don't expect someone writing something new from scratch. And DOS
certainly
has not been waiting for REXX and friends.
Tom
> Not that I would
> mind.
On Sun, 15 Dec 2024, Danilo Pecher via Freedos-devel wrote:
Tom, what's the joke with the references to Linux? Not that I would
mind. I've run Linux since 1994. Took home an early Slackware system
on 64 floppy disks, had to write an X11 driver for my weird-ass 512K
Realtek SVGA card and then rui
Tom, what's the joke with the references to Linux? Not that I would
mind. I've run Linux since 1994. Took home an early Slackware system
on 64 floppy disks, had to write an X11 driver for my weird-ass 512K
Realtek SVGA card and then ruined my eyes looking at 1024x768 pixels
interlaced, but why woul
> I'd agree with Tom here. Reinventing the wheel makes little sense.
> After all, one of the points of FreeDOS is being a free replacement
> of, well DOS, so you shouldn't really need a replacement for something
> that has worked fairly well since the Romans left.
> In fact, I'm not even sure we
> A build system overhaul would also be nice. As it is now, nearly a hundred C
> files are compiled, each containing a single translated string.
So what? It's done automatically, and a complete rebuild (which is needed only
once due to MAKE) takes
(in a Windows XP DOS box with decent *write
Good grief. Have you even had a look at the sources? Most of it iis
stuff that was written when people were still carrying their wives
over their shoulders and they used to club mammoths for a meal. You
don't need a C20 compiler to build most of the GNU tools. FreeDOS is a
free implementation of a
Ah! I misunderstood entirely. Yep, that's a problem that needs
rectification. That makes more work for the whole build system due to
the fixed overhead of dealing with each compilation unit, as well as
the effort that must be exerted by the linker at the end.
The only reason that comes into
> I was talking about a hundred .C files PER LANGUAGE.
Ah! I misunderstood entirely. Yep, that's a problem that needs
rectification. That makes more work for the whole build system due to the
fixed overhead of dealing with each compilation unit, as well as the effort
that must be exerted by the l
On 14.12.2024 21:48, Kirn Gill II via Freedos-devel wrote:
Because that's how the vast majority of projects are organized; The
text strings for each supported language live in their own separate
translation files.
This is NOT what I was talking about. I was talking about a hundred .C
files
> Most GNU tools, especially those that you would use outside of a gcc dev
enironment, don't require gcc.
Immediate message before yours has:
> Or they at least assume a more recent-standard Unix-like compiler.
So that was addressed before you got there.
> I can say that with some confidence,
I'd agree with Tom here. Reinventing the wheel makes little sense.
After all, one of the points of FreeDOS is being a free replacement
of, well DOS, so you shouldn't really need a replacement for something
that has worked fairly well since the Romans left.
In fact, I'm not even sure we should go t
On 14.12.2024 18:41, tom ehlert via Freedos-devel wrote:
however, teaching freecom.com new tricks would be welcome, even if pretty much
nobody
would ever know about and use them.
A build system overhaul would also be nice. As it is now, nearly a
hundred C files are compiled, each containing
On 14.12.2024 18:22, Danilo Pecher via Freedos-devel wrote:
Unless any program uses gas' AT&T assembler syntax there should be no
source that requires gcc to compile. Everything else can be handled
via #ifdef's.
Technically yes, but good luck convincing people to make the required
changes whe
> * Create a new alternative shell, similar to COMMAND.COM but with expanded
> BAT programming.
creating a *new* command.com is a really idiotic idea. the existing freecom.com
is stable, tested,
and mostly bugfree. Why would someone even get the idea to create a *new* one
(including investing
Jim, if you have a package name at hand where you think it is
dependent on gcc, let me know. I'll port it to OWC and we may even
work out some general guidelines on how to 'port' sources from gcc to
OWC. I could use a good challenge. Ever since I learned C on Dec. 31st
1990, I've made it a traditio
Unless any program uses gas' AT&T assembler syntax there should be no
source that requires gcc to compile. Everything else can be handled
via #ifdef's.
On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 at 18:18, Jim Hall via Freedos-devel
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 9:34 AM Danilo Pecher via Freedos-devel
> wrote:
> >
Ah, now I'm getting where you come from. The question is, why would
anyone need it? The GNU tools that actually make sense under FreeDOS:
make, patch, flex, bison, findutils don't really need gcc.
Realistically only things like binutils should really need gcc because
of the use of AT&T assembler s
On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 9:34 AM Danilo Pecher via Freedos-devel
wrote:
>
> As I wrote in my reply to Jim's email, I don't think introducing
> additional toolchains makes any sense. In fact it would be a good idea
> to have all 'official' packages that are based on C compile with OWC.
> I don't kno
Jim Hall wrote:
>> Several of the GNU tools assume you're compiling with GCC. Or they at
>> least assume a more recent-standard Unix-like compiler.
>>
>> In these cases, trying to port a GNU utility to FreeDOS using OpenWatcom
>> can be a lot harder than just compiling it with a GCC compiler like
>
As I wrote in my reply to Jim's email, I don't think introducing
additional toolchains makes any sense. In fact it would be a good idea
to have all 'official' packages that are based on C compile with OWC.
I don't know if that has changed, but I remember MKEYB at some point
required Turbo-C to comp
i need help with a new freedos program! :D?
it is https://github.com/sparky4/mh
i need to know about dflat+ and how to use it~
i cannot seem to find documentation
we also need more 16 bit utilities <3
On Sat, 2024-12-14 at 18:02 +0800, Bruce Axtens via Freedos-devel
wrote:
> Assuming I'm an exp
Dflat+ is a dos text mode library that is styled to mimick the
Microsoft windows API.
Some info can be found here :
https://pushbx.org/ecm/editsrc/DOC/DFLATP/DFP100.HTM
On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 at 16:38, victoria crenshaw via Freedos-devel
wrote:
>
> i need help with a new freedos program! :D?
>
> it
Hi Jim,
I don't think it is a good idea to introduce a second toolchain. Most
GNU tools, especially those that you would use outside of a gcc dev
enironment, don't require gcc. I can say that with some confidence,
because I compiled them using non-gcc compilers under AIX and HP-UX in
the past, an
Hi,On Dec 14, 2024, at 9:13 AM, Bruce Axtens via Freedos-devel wrote:This IA-16 GCC? https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/2022/01/ia-16-gcc-toolchain-and-libi86-library-jan-2022-version-BruceThe one you want used to be on GitHub [1], However, the developer moved most of the IA16 stuff to GitLab
This IA-16 GCC?
https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/2022/01/ia-16-gcc-toolchain-and-libi86-library-jan-2022-version
-Bruce
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Several of the GNU tools assume you're compiling with GCC. Or they at least
assume a more recent-standard Unix-like compiler.
In these cases, trying to port a GNU utility to FreeDOS using OpenWatcom
can be a* lot harder* than just compiling it with a GCC compiler like IA-16
GCC. (Djgpp is great to
I have to admit, I'm rather confused about the gcc IA-16 thing too.
Jim seems to like it a lot, but Watcom code runs on all processors
too, provided you use the proper options to have it compile for the
lowest common demoninator, which would be the 8086.
On Sat, 14 Dec 2024 at 11:04, Bruce Axtens
Assuming I'm an experienced programmer (have been since 1983),
* Port FreeDOS utilities to OpenWatcom C (our preferred C compiler) and
NASM (our preferred assembler).
Specifically?
* Apply some much-needed patches to the Freemacs editor
Where's the list of fixes?
* Write some cool e
36 matches
Mail list logo
