Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

Hi All, Update on that SBEMU that I mentioned at the start of this thread. Skip if you don’t care about the test machine So, I have this old 17-inch Toshiba Satellite P25-S5092 battleship sized notebook. It has just about every possible port, slot and other option for

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

Hi, On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 7:53 AM wrote: > > So…. > > There is only an old version with sources. Or, a newer version without > sources. We only have 1.1 of P5 mirrored (so far). I've built 1.4 (pcom.exe, pint.exe) locally but haven't run the test suite yet. (He changed it so my old GNUmakefi

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

> On Feb 21, 2023, at 7:41 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > > Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 10:22 AM > wrote: >> >> On Feb 21, 2023, at 3:19 AM, jer...@shidel.net wrote: >> [..] >> I’ve not looked into P5 Pascal. It would be nice to have a alternative to >> FPC for DOS. >>

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

Hi, On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 10:22 AM wrote: > > On Feb 21, 2023, at 3:19 AM, jer...@shidel.net wrote: > [..] > I’ve not looked into P5 Pascal. It would be nice to have a alternative to FPC > for DOS. > > > I just took a quick look at P5 at https://sourceforge.net/projects/pascalp5/ > > I did not

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

Hi Rugxulo, > On Feb 21, 2023, at 3:19 AM, jer...@shidel.net wrote: > [..] > I’ve not looked into P5 Pascal. It would be nice to have a alternative to FPC > for DOS. I just took a quick look at P5 at https://sourceforge.net/projects/pascalp5/ I did not see any binaries for DOS. Can it target DO

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 1:37 AM wrote: > On Feb 20, 2023, at 4:17 PM, Louis Santillan wrote: > > [..] > GW-BASIC - MIT License, Microsoft’s original 1983 version > https://github.com/microsoft/GW-BASIC > > > tkchia has a better branch that should be easier to compile and will > be more complete.

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

Hi, > On Feb 20, 2023, at 4:17 PM, Louis Santillan wrote: >> [..] >> GW-BASIC - MIT License, Microsoft’s original 1983 version >> https://github.com/microsoft/GW-BASIC > > tkchia has a better branch that should be easier to compile and will > be more complete. > https://github.com/tkchia/GW-BAS

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

Hi, > On Feb 20, 2023, at 9:17 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 1:37 PM wrote: >> >> Other possible new packages to consider for inclusion (or at least watch): >> >> 386SWAT - GPLv3, Debugger (may require someone to compile) >> https://github.com/sudleyplace/386SWAT >

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

Hi, On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 1:37 PM wrote: > > Other possible new packages to consider for inclusion (or at least watch): > > 386SWAT - GPLv3, Debugger (may require someone to compile) > https://github.com/sudleyplace/386SWAT You mean the old compile isn't sufficient? (IIRC, it was on his websit

Re: [Freedos-devel] More on Packages

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:37 AM wrote: [SNIP] > Other possible new packages to consider for inclusion (or at least watch): [SNIP] > > GW-BASIC - MIT License, Microsoft’s original 1983 version > https://github.com/microsoft/GW-BASIC tkchia has a better branch that should be easier to compile and