On Jul 15, 2011 7:41 AM, "Eric Auer" wrote:
>
>
> Hi Eduardo,
>
> inthndlr.c int2F_12_handler should implement this...
>
> >> So in short, I do not know what broke int 2f.122b and 122d
> >> or whether it was removed deliberately. The changelog says:
> >
> > Definitely, they are not implemented.
>
Hi Eduardo,
inthndlr.c int2F_12_handler should implement this...
>> So in short, I do not know what broke int 2f.122b and 122d
>> or whether it was removed deliberately. The changelog says:
>
> Definitely, they are not implemented.
> Supporting country.sys and nlsfunc are completely different
> So in short, I do not know what broke int 2f.122b and 122d
> or whether it was removed deliberately. The changelog says:
Definitely, they are not implemented.
> - the unstable branch supports country.sys in kernel 2037
>
> - the stable branch supports country.sys in kernel 2039 and 2040
Suppo
Hi!
>> Eek. Um, anybody want to tell us why 2039 has it but 2040 doesn't??
>> Certainly lacking NLSFUNC support can't be good, can it? :-/
>
> 2039 was part of the UNSTABLE series, along with 2035 and 2037 and had
> a lot of experimental features, but also had the unstable tag for a
> reason ;-
2011/7/15 Rugxulo :
> Eek. Um, anybody want to tell us why 2039 has it but 2040 doesn't??
> Certainly lacking NLSFUNC support can't be good, can it? :-/
2039 was part of the UNSTABLE series, along with 2035 and 2037 and had
a lot of experimental features, but also had the unstable tag for a
reas
Hi,
On 7/14/11, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
> Op 15-7-2011 0:42, Eduardo Casino schreef:
>
>> Nope. INT2F/122b and INT2f/122d are not implemented in kernel 2040
>> (they were in 2039) Don't use NLSFUNC with kernel 2040.
>
> Ouch. Good to know, I'll take this into account.
> NLSFUNC seemed to work though
Op 15-7-2011 0:42, Eduardo Casino schreef:
> Hi Bernd,
hello Eduardo, good to see you're around :)
> Because it is harmless. Is it really necessary to treat that case in a
> different manner than a successful installation? If it is, I'll look
> into that, it is trivial to modify.
it's not real
Hi Bernd,
2011/7/13 Bernd Blaauw :
> 4) Why's NLSFUNC 0.4 not throwing errorlevel 1 or so when already installed?
Because it is harmless. Is it really necessary to treat that case in a
different manner than a successful installation? If it is, I'll look
into that, it is trivial to modify.
> 6)
Hi again,
On 7/13/11, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
> Op 14-7-2011 1:59, Rugxulo schreef:
>
>> All I know is that when I tried a few months ago, it seemed the
>> KEY*.SYS files from 2009 choked on KEYB, but those older ones (2.5?)
>> from 2006 worked fine. That may?? be what you're experiencing.
>
> Could
Op 14-7-2011 1:59, Rugxulo schreef:
> All I know is that when I tried a few months ago, it seemed the
> KEY*.SYS files from 2009 choked on KEYB, but those older ones (2.5?)
> from 2006 worked fine. That may?? be what you're experiencing.
Could be. I tried FD1.0's KEYBOARD.SYS but that made no dif
Hi,
On 7/13/11, Aitor Santamaría wrote:
>
>> 2) Why's KEYB 2.0 crashing under JEMMEX? (see below #1)
>> 3) Why's KEYB 2.0 crashing when clean booting? (see below #2)
>
>> 9) I think Rugxulo mentioned something about KEYB/KEYBOARD.SYS in some
>> earlier mail?
>
> ¿?
Heh.
All I know is that when
Ok, that's on me. I found 2-3 bugs that I have already patched
(almost), I just have to test a bit, then pack it all.
If I don't happen to find time to do it fully, I may distribute two
files (the source and binary) to some people, in case it works better
for you and it is required for 1.1 in the n
Hi Bernd,
Country=31 (Kingdom of the Netherlands), ok...
Codepage 858 (usable by dutch keyboards, ok)...
Well, COUNTRY= is alright.
I can't say anything about NLSFUNC. You'll have to reach Eduardo Casino
for that. Sorry. :(
DISPLAY is alright, so is MODE.
KEYB US (Ok, I learned elsewhere in the
Op 13-7-2011 23:37, Bernd Blaauw schreef:
> hm am I confusing DISPLAY and KEYB once again?..oh well, nevermind my
> previous mail thus.
Time to end my monologue: updating KEYB to 2.00-final, same issues apply
(under kernel 2040).
--
Op 13-7-2011 23:26, Bernd Blaauw schreef:
> Got a link to 2.0-final? Can't even recall how I obtained this one, must
> been from FreeDOS 1.0 likely.
>
> http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/dos/display/
> lists 0.13 ,
> http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=display also.
hm am
Op 13-7-2011 23:15, Aitor Santamaría schreef:
> Hello,
> MODE CON CP SEL=858
> is redundant with
> CHCP 858.
>
> The correct one in this case is CHCP, which changes the codepage
> globally (MODE CON CP SEL would only change it for the CONSOLE).
Thanks. I'll use CHCP if I get it working, otherwise
Hello,
> This NLS stuff is doing my head in, even before trying to automate it in
> configuration scripts..
>
> CONFIG.SYS:
>
> COUNTRY=31,858,C:\FDOS\BIN\COUNTRY.SYS
>
> NLS.BAT / AUTOEXEC.BAT:
> =
> NLSFUNC C:\FDOS\BIN\
Op 10-7-2011 16:07, Aitor Santamaría schreef:
> Hello,
>
This NLS stuff is doing my head in, even before trying to automate it in
configuration scripts..
CONFIG.SYS:
COUNTRY=31,858,C:\FDOS\BIN\COUNTRY.SYS
NLS.BAT / AUTOEXEC.BAT:
=
Hello,
2011/7/10 Eric Auer :
>
> Hi Aitor,
>
> It still needs a lot of unnecessary UMB room free to load there, e.g.
> 64 kb or some fairly high amount. And you may even have to explicitly
> mention it. I forget exactly and always (I think) loaded it low. Well,
> I'd have to check
Hi Aitor,
It still needs a lot of unnecessary UMB room free to load there, e.g.
64 kb or some fairly high amount. And you may even have to explicitly
mention it. I forget exactly and always (I think) loaded it low. Well,
I'd have to check
>>>
>>> If only I could assume th
Hi Eric,
2011/7/10 Eric Auer :
>
> Hi Aitor, Rugxulo,
>
>>> It still needs a lot of unnecessary UMB room free to load there, e.g.
>>> 64 kb or some fairly high amount. And you may even have to explicitly
>>> mention it. I forget exactly and always (I think) loaded it low. Well,
>>> I'd have to che
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
> I can't recall *any* other EDIT version reporting its version unless by
> "/?" or perhaps when starting an empty file.
Which is the exact behavior of the QBASIC editor used in MS-DOS 5 and 6
(and PC DOS 5.x).
Personally, I'd dispense with that - as MS
Hi,
On 7/10/11, Eric Auer wrote:
>
Pretty stuck at using EDIT as a baseline replacement of MS EDIT.
Other programs always welcome as extension.
>>>
>>> Well, the 64 kb file limit was a bit of a put-off for me, personally.
>>> Maybe good for average use, I guess (just not my favorite pre
Hi,
On 7/10/11, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
>
> Also going to run UPX (--best --8086) over it to reduce filesize:)
"--ultra-brute --lzma --8086" is optimal. But LZMA is a lot slower to
unpack on really ancient machines, hence why it's not default for
dos/mz.
Heck, I think there's even (undocumented?) "
Op 10-7-2011 10:14, Aitor Santamaría schreef:
> Hi Bernd,
>> * EDIT 0.9a prints its version and DFLAT banner at every invocation.
> in the background. If it causes problems, I have annotated to create a
> switch to turn it off.
Programs usually don't print any banners or version output unless they
Hi Aitor, Rugxulo,
>> It still needs a lot of unnecessary UMB room free to load there, e.g.
>> 64 kb or some fairly high amount. And you may even have to explicitly
>> mention it. I forget exactly and always (I think) loaded it low. Well,
>> I'd have to check
>
> If only I could assume that
Hello,
2011/6/30 Rugxulo :
>> I remember DISPLAY 2.0 being troublesome with regard to UMBs, but that
>> was years ago.
>
> It still needs a lot of unnecessary UMB room free to load there, e.g.
> 64 kb or some fairly high amount. And you may even have to explicitly
> mention it. I forget exactly an
Hello,
2011/6/29 Bernd Blaauw :
> I remember DISPLAY 2.0 being troublesome with regard to UMBs, but that
> was years ago.
It is not that it is "trobulesome" with regards to UMBs, but that you
hardly ever have so much room in UMBs to load it.
DISPLAY allows you to have a maximum of 5 codepages pre
Hi Bernd,
Briefly in DOS, both kernel and character device drivers are (or
should be) codepage aware.
- Kernel because of the collation tables, used for example to turn
filenames into the uppercase, and so store them uppercased in the FAT
- Character devices, because sending out a character to a c
Hi again,
Just some brief comments.
On 6/30/11, Rugxulo wrote:
>>>
I did make a bootdisk a while back (year ago?) intending to demo the
codepage stuff with FreeDOS, but I never finished it
>
> At risk of boring everyone (or even accidentally spamming the group),
> I'll post my AUTOEX
Hi!
>> COUNTRY.SYS isn't needed for DISPLAY-only stuff, e.g. codepages on
>> screen, nor for KEYB either. It's only other stuff (collate
>> tables, y/n), I think.
Yes. And if you only need country style numbers and times, often
the kernel built-in country table can be enough for you.
> Most of
Hi!
>> IIRC, PRINTER.SYS only supported a few different kinds of printers anyway,
>> and was relatively useless even back in the day (at least for me).
>
> Well, I can't remember if it even exists! And, let's be honest,
> printers are a pain even at the best of times. So me holding out blind
> h
> you say you've messed around with a lot of keyboard layouts and
> codepages. That called my attention.
>
> Would you mind telling me which codepages you tried? I'm
> particularly looking for cp854 and cp776. I just know that they
> existed but I never found their description.
>
> If necessary, I
Saluton denove,
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
> Saluton, scipovanto! :-)
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Henrique Peron wrote:
>> Hi Ruĝulo,
>>
>>> I did make a bootdisk a while back (year ago?) intending to demo the
>>> codepage stuff with FreeDOS, but I never finishe
Saluton, scipovanto!:-)
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Henrique Peron wrote:
> Hi Ruĝulo,
>> No offense to anybody, but even I know MS i18n codepage support is a
>> joke. They never even bothered supporting Latins 1-4.
>>
>> I did make a bootdisk a while back (year ago?) intending to demo t
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Henrique Peron wrote:
>
>> Well, what explicit languages are you trying to support? Honestly, if
>> you don't care about "full" NLS, you don't need everything and the
>> kitchen sink. Latin-1 (850 or 819) is pretty much all you need for the
>> common folk.
>
>
Hi Ruĝulo,
> No offense to anybody, but even I know MS i18n codepage support is a
> joke. They never even bothered supporting Latins 1-4.
>
> I did make a bootdisk a while back (year ago?) intending to demo the
> codepage stuff with FreeDOS, but I never finished it (and nobody else
> seemed interes
Hi Bret,
Em 29/06/2011 18:37, Bret Johnson escreveu:
> I live in the USA, so don't have a need for any alternative language settings
> in my everyday life. But, I have messed around with a lot of keyboard
> layouts and code pages to test some of my keyboard related programs over the
> years, s
Hi all,
> Well, what explicit languages are you trying to support? Honestly, if
> you don't care about "full" NLS, you don't need everything and the
> kitchen sink. Latin-1 (850 or 819) is pretty much all you need for the
> common folk. (I'm not trying to marginalize anyone, just saying it's
> eas
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Bret Johnson wrote:
>
> I live in the USA, so don't have a need for any alternative language settings
> in my everyday life.
Ditto. But we're "behind the times". I think only 24% of the world (or
some such small number) is monolingual. Everybody else speaks m
I live in the USA, so don't have a need for any alternative language settings
in my everyday life. But, I have messed around with a lot of keyboard layouts
and code pages to test some of my keyboard related programs over the years, so
I'll let you know what I've discovered. Nearly all of my ex
Hi again,
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
> Op 29-6-2011 23:07, Rugxulo schreef:
>
>> 2037, 2039 are the only ones supported (not counting 2040, which is
>> "unreleased").
>
> You might want to check the kernel list archives. Jim seems to be on
> holiday so nothing listed yet
Op 29-6-2011 23:07, Rugxulo schreef:
> COUNTRY.SYS isn't needed for DISPLAY-only stuff, e.g. codepages on
> screen, nor for KEYB either. It's only other stuff (collate tables,
> y/n), I think.
Ah yes thanks for mentioning that. I'd like kinda 'full' support.
> 2037, 2039 are the only ones supp
I will try to respond better when I'm home. Kernel 2040 is released but not
yet announced. Use share & country that is with kernel. I believe I
checked all versions floating around a year or so ago & have latest share
with kernel (I need to verify both SVN versions). I don't know much about
us
Hi, quick reply from memory, others can answer too of course,
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 2:01 AM, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
> Dear developer list,
>
> could anyone please help me out with a config.sys/autoexec.bat
> implementation of NLS-specific settings?
> I'm horribly confused by how startup files shou
45 matches
Mail list logo
