On Tue, 15 May 2007, Bart Oldeman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> would people here support a conversion of the FreeDOS CVS repository
> (kernel, freecom, install, mem) to Subversion (SVN)? One big plus is
> that CRLF problems would be mostly a thing of the past... what has
> happened a lot is that people check
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Eric Auer wrote:
> Your floppy.c does not seem to be current FORMAT 0.91v,
> as line numbers differ. You probably mean lines 502/544:
> First is "always update params.cyl/sec/sides", not only
> if the /f: option is used, and second is an "if (TRUE) {x}"
> block which limits th
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Tony G wrote:
> And just what is wrong with development in C? It could be worse, they could
> have used B...
I agree, C can be as bloated or as compact as you want.
-uso.
> - Original Message -
> From: "Oleg O. Chukaev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Ladislav Lacina wrote:
> I would like to ask: which file manager is preffered for FreeDOS
> distributions? I think it is very important thing - nobody will use DOS
> without any NC clone. And it is stupid to not have such thing on the
> distribution CD/diskette. Maybe Necrom
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Alain M. wrote:
> In fact I made my own distro. It's a single floppy, single language and
> install exactly where MS-DOS did: in C:\DOS
>
> Some time ago, I tried to talk about that kind of distro, but every one
> wanted a big, too-full, graphic, and I don't know what... so I
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Ladislav Lacina wrote:
> DR-DOS 7.3 really hasn't FAT32 support and isn't free but we don't discuss
> this system.
> The theme of the day is Enhanced DR-DOS (EDR-DOS) which has origin in
> OpenDOS 7.1 and is free. The license isn't GNU, it is something different
> and a little
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Aitor Santamar?a wrote:
Jim suggested "classic", another word (perhaps more precise) that
comes to my mind is "legacy", but I'm not saying I like it better, I
just post the idea.
How about "classic, legacy and also new" ?
I don't see any reason DOS should be limited to be
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Jim Hall wrote:
> This has always been my vision: Post "1.0", I'd also like to see more
> utilities to make it possible to replicate some of the advanced
> features we take for granted in modern operating systems, such as
> Linux. I want to revive GNUish and replicate a modern
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Ladislav Lacina wrote:
> It seems that FreeDOS project is in another crisis now. There is nobody who
> develops kernel (compatibility with MS-DOS is still not perfect), we still
> lack some disk utilities for FAT32 and so on.
> There is too small number of active FreeDOS dev
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, tom ehlert wrote:
> as far as I know FreeDOS works great on AMD64 (in good old real mode);
> no need for such a (completely empty) project
Yep. I have an AMD64, never had trouble running DOS if I needed it.
-uso.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2006, TG wrote:
> I have a (silly) question. A brand new installation of FreeDOS 1.0 is
> supposed to emulate what version of MS-DOS?
As far as I know, 3.31.
> Right now, my base install of FreeDOS 1.0 reminds me of a cross between
> MS-DOS 3.3 and MS-DOS 5.0. I know there will pr
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Alain M. wrote:
> Eric Auer escreveu:
>>
>> you have to decide yourself whether things are interesting
>> for the list. sometimes it can be better to mail a few
>> people directly first, and only start using the list as
>> soon as things start being of public interest.
>
> Tha
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006, Johnson Lam wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 11:10:25 -0300, you wrote:
>
>> Ber ramdisk is XMSDSK, it's very robust, 2Gbyte, free but no source.
>> TDISK also works very well and I believe that it is part of FreeDOS
>
> I like Resizeable RAMDISK, GPL have source. More stable than
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006, Tony wrote:
> Would boot floppy emulation (used on Windows 95/98) be easier to implement?
> I'm looking from a marketing perspective. ISOLINUX throws Linux out there to
> the enduser even though the result is FreeDOS on the machine. I think that a
> FreeDOS install CD should bo
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, Tony wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Now I know most of us have a Windows machine with a legitimate copy of
> Nero or maybe even a freeware ISO making utility so I was wondering...
>
> Why hasn't anyone made a boot CD that boots using FreeDOS instead of
> ISOLINUX?
>
> Don't get me wron
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Imre Leber wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Lyrical Nanoha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2006 02:28 PM
>> To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] djgpp
>>
>>
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
> Lyrical Nanoha wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
>>> For me, a FreeDOS that does not properly run on a real PC is utterly
>>> useless.
>
>> DR-DOS still works on an 8086. ROM-DOS works
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Johnson Lam wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 11:48:35 +, you wrote:
>
> Hi Imre,
>
>> After having an extensive private chat with Eric. I was wondering what
>> the overall interest of the project would be to move the FreeDOS
>> utilities to a DJGPP based platform.
>
> Eric al
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 11:48:35AM +, Imre Leber wrote:
>> After having an extensive private chat with Eric. I was wondering
>> what the overall interest of the project would be to move the FreeDOS
>> utilities to a DJGPP based platform.
>
> Do
On Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Frederic Logghe wrote:
> Since several years, I'm using Turbo C on MS-DOS. Last week, my PC crashed
> and I'm now planning to use FreeDOS. I just wonder if anyone has positive
> experiences running Turbo C on FreeDOS?
Turbo C++ 1.01: No problems whatsoever.
-uso.
--
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Daniel Franzini wrote:
> well...i'm not exactly an expert in the subject but i've noticed that
> freepascal suports nasm output...and nasm can generate 16bit code...not sure
> if it is 286 real or protected mode code, altough it seems to be real mode
> (i've seen people writin
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Blair Campbell wrote:
> I personally much prefer Debian, which is free in every form, easy to
> install, and easy to use.
Yeah. Debian, or Ubuntu which is pretty much the same thing.
-uso.
-
Using Tomc
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
> Borland C is, also as OpenWatcom, doesn't run on less than 80386.
> But why you not complain about Borland C, but complain about more
> functional and portable OpenWatcom?
Turbo C++ is also Borland C, though stripped down, and prior to v3 did r
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Gregory Pietsch wrote:
>After much looking around, I've seen two types of open-source C
>compilers. The first type are monstrosities such as OpenWatcom and gcc.
>The second type are old compilers such as PCC and DeSmet and "toy"
>compilers that do not support C89, much less
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Jim Hall wrote:
> We're still getting hit pretty hard on the web site, although traffic
> seems to be dropping. We're down to about 50MB/hour. To help bandwidth
> issues, I've updated the stylesheets to be very light on the images -
> the FreeDOS fish logo and the (mandatory)
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hey jackass, did it occur to you that your actions will cause problems with
> people trying to download the ISO's? Or who have already downloaded it?
> Jackass.
Get lost, troll.
-uso.
On Mon, 28 Aug 2006, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
> Documentation is need for program using and should be included into
> binary package. Or, you may use triple-architecture: binary package
> (executables and other (data) files, which need for those executables),
> documentation package (user guid
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> At 06:22 PM 8/23/2006 -0400, Lyrical Nanoha wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
>>
>>> Not good enough? Probably not. I'll compress EMM386 with the option next
>>> time, but unless a person wit
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> Not good enough? Probably not. I'll compress EMM386 with the option next
> time, but unless a person with an 8086 is available for pre-testing, it may
> not make a difference. Does anybody here have an 8086 and can act as a
> test subject in a reason
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> At 11:02 PM 8/23/2006 +0200, Joris van Rantwijk wrote:
>
>>> And how about emm386 and himem?
>>
>> HIMEM.EXE (HIMEM64 3.12) crashes on "shl cx,4" even when invoked
>> as "himem /?".
>> Same problem with HIMEM64 3.23.
>> Same problem with EMM386.EXE 2.08
On Sat, 19 Aug 2006, Andreas Bollhalder wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Markus Laire wrote:
>> I think it's quite clear that www.bootdisk.com is a warez-site.
> Where did you read that ? Do you really know, that they don't have asked
> for permission ? I saw this site
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Andre Tertling wrote:
> Do you really want to start a lengthy discussion about whether I am
> using a legitimately created backup with my original license or not? For
> heaven's sake, I'll ship the original discs along with the license.
I might still be able to locate one of
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 8/17/06, Mark Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Michael:
>>
>> Try www.bootdisk.com. boot622.exe will extract a usable MSDOS boot
>
> Is that legal?
> I didn't find any kind of legal FAQ from that site.
Nope.
-uso.
---
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> [sent again with the right SourceForge-approved e-mail address this time]
>
> Anybody have a MS-DOS 5.x or 6.x image around I could use? I need to do
> some side-by-side testing in Qemu of MS-DOS against FreeDOS. I had an
> image, but it seems to have
On Sun, 6 Aug 2006, Blair Campbell wrote:
> A pointer was getting overwritten earlier, this should fix the problem
> people have been having with the PATH variable. And I have no idea
> why the diff is so big; that was unintended.
I use diff -wu, might shrink the .diff a bit if whitespace is the
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> Fixed, although I'm not sure a 286 would get there. Does UPX decompressor
> run under non-386? If not, the decompression code will stop it first.
Yes. I've run UPX'd binaries on 8086 (Tandy 1000HX) before
-uso.
---
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Michael Devore wrote:
> Here's my initial problem with this idea: it works when you get step
> outside of the Qemu DOS sandbox. Plus it works (or worked) in Bochs, since
> I remember testing it under Linux a year or two ago when trying to figure
> out what the heck was going
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Alain M. wrote:
> FWIR path should not work as an envirenment variabla unless the /E optio
> is usen on the first invocation...
>
> alain
That's APPEND
-uso.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Fut
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Imre Leber wrote:
(I said)
>>
>> I've myself mentioned a couple times (years ago) my plan to take FreeDOS
>> in a new direction but it depends on me being able to use certain tools
>> that do not yet work for me. (i.e., anything using WatTCP/WatT32). If I
>> could get WatT32 w
On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, HCL BA wrote:
> The version number is not important to me as FreeDOS has passed through some
> milestones.
> Being compatible to MSDOS 3.3 is good enough. Forget the Windows series,
> List, Dbase 3, Lotus 123, Laplink and Wordstar just play well with 640K
> memory.
>
> I think
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Blair Campbell wrote:
> I'm preparing FreeDOS 1.0-pre1 as we speak.
Excellent.
-uso.
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application S
On Thu, 29 Jun 2006, Jim Hall wrote:
> I don't _really_ think FreeDOS is dead. But we have stalled. There
> hasn't been any new development with FreeDOS in a long time. The last
> news item on the web site was posted 8 June, but the last FreeDOS news
> item dates back to 16 May and 11 January.
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Arkady V.Belousov wrote:
Hi!
13-Июн-2006 14:26 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alain M.) wrote to
freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net:
AM> OTOH, OW does not have all the Borland functions,
It have _no one_ Borland' function. "Borland" name for OW team has bad
reputation and there
On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, Blair Campbell wrote:
>> Given that a 8086/8088/80186 chip can't have XMS by definition, I'm missing
>> the conceptual bridge on its use as a support option.
>
> Well, it makes it more possible to have a reasonably featureful
> 'universal' freecom so that the same thing can be
On Sun, 28 May 2006, Blair Campbell wrote:
Although there is no source, the license terms are essentially a BSD or
Zlib license and allow modification and redistribution.
JPSoft says that they'll be releasing the source code later this year.
Whether or not it should replace FreeCOM is a comple
On Sun, 28 May 2006, Aitor Santamaría wrote:
(4) My 2€-c about 4DOS: there were some clains of it's being
distributed under Open Source license, what's about that?
Until this happens, I am for placing it into a 3rd party software. I
am still dubious if it is convenient to include non-open source
On Mon, 22 May 2006, Florian Xaver wrote:
btw: Why doesn'T FreeDOS support "last access time" of a file/directory?
Because DOS doesn't
-uso.
k
---
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done qui
http://www.dosius.ath.cx/~andi/grodin.htm
This is a bit broken but it's my first try in a couple years at making an
ODIN disk. I think I'm a bit rusty.
This one is called GrODIN - the Graphical One Disk Installation. It's got
a FreeGEM distro on the disk.
I'm not sure how well any of this
48 matches
Mail list logo
