wish VMWare or such software could be configured to run in strict 8086
mode).
Why not suggest this to the VMWare team?
---
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download
it for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
Please remember all - that also a good product without the right
publicity is dead.
Bye, Flo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
webmail
Hi David,
MEM: who was working on that? progress?
This is described in the 1.0 TODO wiki, but I have not heard back
about the recent progress for quite a while. There should be some
MEM 1.8, but I do not know where you can get 1.7-and-a-half now.
Sorry, right now I am not able to
Hi! Very nice topic :-)
Beta 9 Enhanced Release distro as a FreeDOS 1.0 pre-release distro.
I would rather call it a FreeDOS 1.0 technology preview 1, because
there are some known missing features but MOST aspects ARE 1.0-worthy.
For one, this would mean that it would get tested more
Hi Aitor...
I'm sorry, but my own opinion is NO. First of all, there are features
about MEM, AtapiCDD and why not, DISPLAY that should be finished...
I would suggest to drop ATAPICDD from that list.
But worst of all, the large number of bugs already existing. I doubt
that naming it 1.0
Hi Eric,
Sorry, I'm SO lazy to read all this...
I just skip to the things pointing to me.
Eric Auer escribió:
Hi! Very nice topic :-)
I know you like it, but we have discussed this once and once again...
For KEYB, Aitor's TODO lists memory tuning, PC-XT support, Japanese
API (?), beeping
Hi Aitor...
So Eric will confirm if /M is already implemented...
Jason did some testing and, contrary to my assumptions, found
no useful improvement by adding some local buffers. Plus we
have a dedicated cd-rom cache which works better anyway, so I
would call the /M thing in SHSUCDX a
Hi,
Eric Auer escribió:
Hi Aitor...
I'm sorry, but my own opinion is NO. First of all, there are features
about MEM, AtapiCDD and why not, DISPLAY that should be finished...
I would suggest to drop ATAPICDD from that list.
And how is that you suggest it NOW and not THEN?
But worst of
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 03:39:04 +0200 (MEST)
From: Eric Auer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Freedos-devel] re: FreeDOS 1.0
Reply-To: freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
[...]
MEM: who was working on that? progress?
This is described in the 1.0 TODO wiki
At 10:05 PM 10/16/2005 +0200, Eric Auer wrote:
EMM386 HIMEM cpu-checking: The effort / gain ratio speaks for
making EMM386 / HIMEM foolproof in terms of CPU checking, yes.
Detection should be reactivated when the next release of EMM386 and HIMEM
use the modified UPX compression tool.
some others like Win 3.11 compat
should probably be fixed before we call it FreeDOS 1.0 ...
There is probably a patent to prevent us of it anyway :(
ASM I don't think so... Did it prevent DR-DOS from doing that anyway? I
ASM think it's just a question of misscompatibilities here or there...
Hi, some comments on your comments...
HIMEM /INT15H=... should not be extremely hard to do, so I vote for it.
HIMEM /HMAMIN=m is indeed not very useful. Being able to allocate PARTS
of the HMA would be nice but was not introduced before MS DOS 7 or so,
and before that time, HMAMIN protected
Hi!
25--2004 21:05 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Auer) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
EA HIMEM /HMAMIN=m is indeed not very useful. Being able to allocate PARTS
EA of the HMA would be nice but was not introduced before MS DOS 7 or so,
EA and before that time, HMAMIN protected the system from giving
Hi,
Alain has introduced in this mail something interesting that was
introduced in other posts too: the spec mentions a kernel compatible to
MS-DOS 3.30, but actually I think that our current FreeDOS kernel is
closer to 5.0 and sucessors than 3.30. Also 3.30 and 5.0 have many
differences in
Eric Auer escribió:
Hi, some comments on your comments...
HIMEM /INT15H=... should not be extremely hard to do, so I vote for it.
That's another argument that I like: low cost to implement it. A third
opinion (or more) for the untie?
Eric, you say DOS5 we have it more or less, I just watch
15 matches
Mail list logo
