Hello, all!
Despite this being my first post, I've been following (and using) FreeDOS
for quite a while. I have to commend you all on an excellent implementation
of the classic DOS environment!
I have always loved the muscle of DOS - there's no fluff; just raw power to
get the job done. My
Hi Eric!
Yes, this shell (as well as my GUI from which I'm porting it) is completely
open source.
I guess it could fit under either category? When the port is finished, it
will be an exact clone of the MS-DOS command.com, only with added features.
Users need not concern themselves with said
Hi Jim!
I've quite literally *just* begun work on this so it's nowhere near ready
for prime time. As soon as I fix the 'cd' command it'll be much more
useful, so I'll probably release the first version then even though the
advanced features won't be quite ready for another release or two. The
I'm wondering why I never thought of that lol
Downloading FreeBASIC now :)
Thanks for the tip!
--
Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business
Can anyone can shed some light on why I'm getting these build errors
http://mercurycoding.com/unnamed.png? My syntax is exactly as it should
be from the demos and examples I've seen, I've even tried a half dozen
different ways to express the routine. I have no idea why the compiler is
choking
Nevermind... figured it out. The IDE set the default language to QB
compatibility. Duh.
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 2:27 AM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
Can anyone can shed some light on why I'm getting these build errors
http://mercurycoding.com/unnamed.png? My syntax
Network drivers in the DOS world aren't quite like other DOS drivers.
Normally you only need one .exe to do the job, but with networking you will
need a few files: a packet driver for the hardware itself and, depending on
what protocol your software expects, maybe a TCP stack as well. The packet
the ground up will be justified.
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 2:07 AM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
Nevermind... figured it out. The IDE set the default language to QB
compatibility. Duh.
Great, just after
It will provide all the typical features of the base shell, including the
following new features:
-The new drives command displays what drive letters are available in the
environment and details on each.
-A selection of four separate shells running concurrently which can be
switched between
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Tom Ehlert t...@drivesnapshot.de wrote:
in a new implemented, most likely buggy way (FreeCOM also had bazillion
of bugs which were removed over much time and effort)
Hopefully not! :)
can it run batches?
As of right now, no, but in its final form, yes. It
Hi, Travis, and thanks for the feedback!
Are you kidding? There's been many many times I wanted a feature that
would allow me to do a dos function in the background while I kept doing
whatever it was I was already doing in the foreground. A way to switch to
a second shell, do something, and
Thanks for that, grabbed it.
As far as I know, powerbasic is the only company that still actively sells
and supports a dos compiler. Their version 3.5 is still available for
purchase. I have their windows version too, though I'm 1 version back
(running pbcc 5.0, and pbwin 8.0), but still
In keeping with Tom's earlier suggestion, I give you *Drives*, the disk
info tool - now in standalone form! :)
It's still a bit buggy - I have to sort out an issue with repeating drive
labels and a couple other odds and ends - but 90% of the program is usable
and functional. Just type drives and
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 2:26 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Right now, I'm using my laptop. I do have a RUFUS USB stick lying
around if you want me to test under raw FreeDOS, but I'm not doing
anything unusual with drives. In other words, my testing is limited in
usefulness. But I have
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 1:41 AM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Fast is subjective (unless you mean compile-time speed, which I'm
assuming here). There are too many diverse x86 machines (with
different speeds) to call anything universally fast anymore.
I was referring to both compile time
I thought the same as Ralf and was surprised to see the vertical bar being
used, and I also wasn't aware you could have more than 26 drives either.
But Drives now checks for letters A - Z, the additional symbols and all
numbers too. That oughta pretty well cover it lol
AM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought the same as Ralf and was surprised to see the vertical bar
being used, and I also wasn't aware you could have more than 26 drives
either. But Drives now checks for letters A - Z, the additional symbols and
all numbers too
I was actually working on a feature like this for my GUI so that it could
automatically load drivers, which does a simple scan of the PCI bus and
reports the devices it finds. There is already a list of PCI device IDs
available at pcidatabase.com, which may be useful to us. I could extract my
PCI
Another thing we could do, in the same vein as the suggestions by Matej,
would be to make an app store of sorts which would function as a package
manager. When run, this program would search the user's hard drive to see
what components are installed, determine their version and see if there is
an
Dunfield Potthast already have PCI bus/NIC sniffers [0][1] and a
collections of NIC packet drivers as well
Georg has some useful stuff there, but the bus scanner isn't (currently, at
least) open source software and couldn't be included in FreeDOS.
I have nothing against the project at all (it would be awesome to have a
DOS with 32 bit speed) but I have to say I agree with Mike - the two
projects should keep separate names. FreeDOS should remain an enhanced
clone of MS-DOS since anything which takes it into the 32 bit realm would,
in my
So far as a tutorial, I'm afraid nothing jumps to mind. However, in my
tests I found that the DOS4GW extender which ships with Watcom is the
fastest.
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
mate...@viste.fr wrote:
On 12/31/2014 08:02 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
Another thing we could do, in the same vein as the suggestions by Matej,
would be to make an app store of sorts which would function as a
package manager. When run, this program would search the user's hard
drive
Jim, will your installer still need the .LSM files?If so, do you need them
for each .EXE or just for each package?
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed
I too would love to see a fully modern DOS.
My thoughts for features added in FreeDOS 2.0: The processor is shifted
into (and stays in, at least as much as possible) protected mode, providing
32-bit addressing. Memory therefore would become a flat 4GB RAM address
space, allowing for advanced
Hi, Aitor :)
Just touching on some of your ideas:
1 - I like the idea of being able to run apps for multiple other OSes, but
I think that ability should fall to a program running atop FreeDOS, not to
the FreeDOS kernel itself. That would be a very cool feature, but the
amount of code needed to
Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a minimum
hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we exclude the
pre-386 crowd without backlash? Personally, I think that's acceptable and
I'm sure Microsoft would've no doubt done the same thing by now had they
not gone
I think that would almost have to be emulator-related. It seems your copy
of DOSemu isn't simulating the disks fully enough for Drives to detect
them. I'd be interested to learn the extent to which it *does* simulate
them, so I could extend my program to work anyway, though.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014
Jim, I think I broke the link you posted in the News section of
FreeDOS.org. Per your suggestion the archive is now called *drives11.zip*.
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored
I didn't see any mention of that, but it would be a great place to start...
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is
I know, right? The IDE is Windows-based but yes, it surprisingly defaulted
to QB compatibility rather than FB.
Yeah, the lack of a 16-bit target made me pretty much write it off for this
project. The project is having string space corruption issues right now
anyway, so a C rewrite (or just
program
I found years ago.
I'll get it working eventually. :)
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, the lack of a 16-bit target made me pretty much write it off
Well, I wasn't advocating that we leave behind our 16-bit roots
altogether, because it is possible to still run 16- as well as 32-bit code
on a 32-bit OS.Then again, if we go to a 32-bit kernel and still run 16-bit
code... exactly what have we gained? Like I said before, I can see both
sides of
It wouldn't be only the speed increase, but the fact that we'd be
modernizing FreeDOS as a whole.
I think of it this way: What would Microsoft have done had they not gone
exclusively to Windows? I am doubtless they would've migrated MS-DOS to a
32-bit platform years ago. If we were to do such a
I doubt that you will even see one (1) 32-bit version of FreeDOS. Whoever
is seriously claiming on working on that just doesn't know what they will
get themselves into. MS/PC/DR-/FreeDOS is at its very core 16bit/x86. You
get yourself in one development hell if you try to change that. And
Vote noted! :)
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/1/2015 2:43 PM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
Speaking of multiple kernels, would it be acceptable to require a
minimum hardware platform for a new version of FreeDOS? Could we
exclude the pre-386 crowd
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Aitor Santamaría aitor...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you Rugxulo!
+1 :)
--
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in
As far as I have seen, DOS allocates one Program Segment Prefix and runs an
app in that segment. When you exit the program, it clears that app out then
loads the next one you run in the same segment. I don't think it would be
that hard to make it allocate an additional PSP every time a new app is
:
On Jan 1, 2015, at 3:46 AM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
I too would love to see a fully modern DOS.
As would I, and I believe everything mentioned in the email would be
perfect for a 32-bit dos. I believe it can be done, and the whole give
each program it's own virtual 86 machine is one I've
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
We in this discussion aren't the first people to question how to
successfully meld the worlds of 32- and 16-bit code while having speed,
flexibility and compatibility. This became an issue way back in the days
LSICQ http://www.freedos.org/software/?prog=lsicq qualifies for removal
as the source is not available.
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org wrote:
...
- I've taken an interest over the last year to go through the software
list and the ibiblio archive, and prune out
Thanks for that! You always have helpful info to share :)
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 7:14 AM, Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de wrote:
Hi security fans,
here are some results from wikipedia-ing around a bit:
As follow-up to my previous mail, now about the topic
of a tool to help several users to
No worries, I still use QBASIC to this day when I have a little algorithm
which needs testing or some little utility program which needs made.
QBASIC *can* change interrupt vectors, but it requires you to load the
interrupt library (QB.QLB I believe?) first. To actually change the
interrupt
Hi, Florian!
I totally agree, but the only problem is that Japheth seems to be gone. :(
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:04 AM, Florian Xaver f...@drdos.org wrote:
Hi all!
I want to add my thoughts to Tom’s e-mail: I think that the first step to
a 32-bit version of FreeDOS has already be done!
+1 +1 +1 :)
However...
I just wanted to point out that - if my grasp on technology is adequate -
going 32-bit need not break either hardware or software compatibility,
since the kernel could detect which CPU on which it is running and either
shift into protected mode or stay in real mode
Thanks for that! I wasn't aware :)
By the way.. how does one pronounce your name? I'm imagining something like
Rug-zoo-low?
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
Jim, I think
Expounding a bit on all the options and variations which have been
presented in this 32- vs. 16-bit debate:
1 - Two separate kernels (one 16-bit and one 32-bit) with a mechanism which
auto-detects what CPU it's running on and launches the appropriate kernel
automatically. Maintains 100% hardware
Programming
http://amd-dev.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wordpress/media/2012/10/24593_APM_v21.pdf
Documentation. Actually I liked it much better then the Intel one.
Br, Tibi
2015-01-06 17:50 keltezéssel, Mercury Thirteen írta:
The only problem is that I haven't been able to find a whole lot
updates have to be made?
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org wrote:
More specifically, the live part would be pre-loaded with the packages
from BASE. It wouldn't unzip the packages at boot-time.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
Thank you! lol
I'll have to give that all a look over. :)
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
This might be longer than necessary, but I figured I may as well dump
it all on ya, just to be complete!
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Mercury Thirteen
I've emailed Bret to seek his permission to include his drivers in FreeDOS
1.2 and am still awaiting a reply. Granted, the source is public anyway,
but it would be nice to make him aware of our intentions.
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi
Updated version 1.2! http://www.mercurycoding.com/drives/drives12.zip
Drives now checks floppy drives to see if they're empty and no longer
prints the launch banner to make it integrate into the OS much more
smoothly. There's more I want to do with this program, but I'm about to
enter a busy
There is a FreeDOS-32 project, but they have yet to make a release.
Including a 32-bit option for users of FreeDOS has been discussed, but
there are currently no plans to do so. If this were ever to happen, I agree
with you on using two separate modes of operation.
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 8:28
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:06 PM, Michael Brutman mbbrut...@brutman.com
wrote:
You are really providing links to me about how protected mode works? I am
somewhat amused.
Your new OS has to be able to arbitrate between conflicts caused by the
multiple running VDMs. If two programs running at
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:14 PM, Michael Brutman mbbrut...@brutman.com
wrote:
Options 1, 2, and 3 do not exist and are not likely to exist for a few
years even after somebody actively starts working on them.
Correct. I never said this was something which could be thrown together
overnight. I
Sounds good to me. :)
I have to say, I love the idea of a 64-bit DPMI. That's an area in which we
would have total creative freedom because (unless I've missed the news)
*nobody* has made such a thing yet. The only problem is that I haven't been
able to find a whole lot of info on 64-bit long
Interesting! I guess that's my one thing I've learned today lol
*Mercury* isn't my birth name either ;-)
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for that! I wasn't aware
So, the installer will automatically extract BASE from the .ZIP of packages
to a RAM disk when booting live? Will this affect how I structure things on
the .ISO?
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Jim Hall jh...@freedos.org wrote:
Let's keep this discussion on the mailing list.
Elsewhere in the
What does everyone think of including DOSVNC
https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/nino/dosvnc.html in FreeDOS 1.2?
--
BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
Develop your own process in accordance with
Posted that to the wrong place.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
What does everyone think of including DOSVNC
https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/nino/dosvnc.html in FreeDOS 1.2
What does everyone think about adding this to the Dev package in the
official 1.2 distro?
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Georg Potthast mail...@georgpotthast.de
wrote:
I ported a graphical IDE to DOS last year:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/fldev/
Please click on the screenshots to
So far as the RBIL, an offline version of this
http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/doc/rbinter/ may suffice.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Louis Santillan lpsan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
[SNIP]
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 1:12 PM,
/2015 6:50 am, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
I am considering starting a test project to determine the feasibility of
implementing a 32-bit FreeDOS kernel. If I decide to do so, who else is
interested in contributing?
Said contributors could assist in coding, help with testing
...@gmail.com*.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Chelson Aitcheson
chelson.aitche...@gmail.com wrote:
Haha I got laughed at and criticized for these ideas.
+1
Just make it don't worry about the community.
+10
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com wrote:
Input? Well, do you really think that people download 281MB ZIP file,
one that also alerts most anti-virus software due to some of it's contents,
without knowing what this is about?
How's that for input?
Ralf
That
I experienced similar issues on my laptop which also lacks a CD-ROM drive.
The current FreeDOS installer seems hard coded to install from a CD-ROM, as
the only way I was able to get it to work was using an external drive via
USB.
Hope this helps.
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 5:16 PM, JAYDEN
Everyone take a look at this ZIP
http://mercurycoding.com/FreeDOS/FreeDOS-1.2.zip and let me know your
feedback. Anything which shouldn't be included? Anything which should but
wasn't? There's a few non-open source programs I didn't catch for removal.
Let me know your input.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de wrote:
...
FLDEV, at least judging from the screenshots, seems nice. And graphical.
...
+1
--
___
That list doesn't contain version information; doing so will require more
time.
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Mateusz Viste mate...@viste.fr wrote:
On 18/06/2015 15:02, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
No, it's
I'm already on it, that was just my quick in-the-middle-of-work way of
saying I'll have to post that later on.
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de wrote:
Hi Mercury,
That list doesn't contain version information; doing so will require more
time.
Please invest
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Mateusz Viste mate...@viste.fr wrote:
On 18/06/2015 15:02, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
No, it's not all that different, just fleshed out and more complete.
What do you mean by 'fleshed out'? And more complete how?
Fleshed out and more complete in that I went
I'm still reviewing the packages to ensure they're all open source
compliant.
What are we considering acceptable in this regard? Are we going only with
software which has been made available under one of the GNU licenses
exclusively? Obviously programs which are free but have no source available
to see our markets or
user base narrowed over one single choice.
Jim, what is your input on this?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
I'm still reviewing the packages to ensure they're all open source
compliant
, Jun 23, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Steve Nickolas usots...@buric.co wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
I guess I didn't scroll up enough to read your reply! Sorry about that,
and
thanks for the input. :)
So, you're saying we should only use 100% GPL software, yes?
I can easily
programs
doesn't put us in too big of a hurt.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm still reviewing the packages to ensure they're all open source
compliant.
What
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Thomas Mueller mueler6...@twc.com wrote:
...
Is WATT-32 not included in the upcoming FreeDOS 1.2? Or is some part of
WATT-32 (watt-32.net) not open-source?
...
Wow, I forgot all about WATT-32. Actually, since it was the official
FreeDOS.org software list
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
...
* CuteMouse needs fixing to avoid closed-source COM2EXE (already done
locally, but no response from maintainer)
* Jemm386 needs to remove JLOAD and similar closed-source pieces (no
maintainer)
* UIDE and XMGR from 2011?
Since it's not directly executable and the rest of the platform is 16-bit,
I suppose there's no need for it to be included as well.
--
Monitor 25 network devices or servers for free with OpManager!
OpManager is web-based
I'm removing the Pegasus mail app due to it being closed source.
--
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Okay, that's the way I will proceed.
Also, I am removing Necromancer's DOS Navigator due to being closed-source.
--
Monitor 25 network devices or servers for free with OpManager!
OpManager is web-based network management
Yes, I had found that but I was looking specifically for code to version
2.09c. I suppose this may do, though, thank you.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Mercury Thirteen
mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, also (lol
/comments?
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
Okay, that's the way I will proceed.
Also, I am removing Necromancer's DOS Navigator due to being closed-source.
--
Monitor 25
Ah, ok. Maybe I was expecting to see copyleft lol
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/24/2015 11:07 AM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
Also, also (lol) I am not finding any source for SRDisk. FreeDOS.org
lists it as GPL, its own documentation lists
this should be an added update to the 1.2 CD.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Ralf Quint freedos...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/24/2015 11:07 AM, Mercury Thirteen wrote:
Also, also (lol) I am not finding any source for SRDisk. FreeDOS.org
lists it as GPL, its own documentation lists it as copyrighted
Attached is the list of everything in the new distro.
Package NameVersion
[Base]
Append 5.0-0.6
Apropos (Part of FastHelp suite)1.1
Assign
Indeed, the package compilation has been available for two weeks now. You
can find it here http://mercurycoding.com/FreeDOS/FreeDOS-1.2.zip.
I posted it to get everyone's feedback, so take a look and see if you find
anything which should be removed or added. I'm fairly certain I didn't yet
catch
Agreed, that was my exact line of thinking.
However, the folks here seem to have come to the conclusion that FreeDOS
will not evolve into the 32-bit realm.
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Antony Gordon cuzint...@gmail.com wrote:
I was re-reading some emails and I think I have an idea of how
Although it is freeware, source code for NDN appears to be unavailable.
Given this project's push towards 100% open software, I am inclined to
exclude it from the FreeDOS 2.0 image.
Any thoughts?
--
, at 3:52 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com
wrote:
Although it is freeware, source code for NDN appears to be unavailable.
Given this project's push towards 100% open software, I am inclined to
exclude it from the FreeDOS 2.0 image.
Any thoughts
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Chelson Aitcheson
chelson.aitche...@gmail.com wrote:
Haha I got laughed at and criticized for these ideas.
+1
Just make it don't worry about the community.
+10
--
I'll look it over and see what it's about. It doesn't seem at first glance
like it's anything that would be used in a kernel, though.
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 4:16 AM, M Vrm netraa...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I don't know.
But it looks good.
I'm sure we can use it for something
But since
On 10/21/2015 8:31 AM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr. wrote:
> ...
> Basically, the new installer uses a list of packages for BASE and ALL
> binaries, and
> a list for BASE and ALL sources.
>
> I did not know how the packages in 1.2 are going to be handled when it comes
> to
> source versus binary only.
On 10/27/2015 3:52 PM, Jim Hall wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Mercury Thirteen
> <mercury0x0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Personally I would rather see an executable installer also and save any
>> batch installers for a floppy distro, A batch would be perfect for
On 10/26/2015 6:46 PM, Eric Auer wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Actually, since the boot disk loads uses floppy caching, the FDI runs
>> reasonably well. As a user, you would not even notice any performance
> As said, floppy target audience includes more 16-bit people compared to
> the almost 100% cd/dvd
I've found it varies widely upon the floppy used. The cheap ones used by
the previous owners of some systems I work with usually have very poor
integrity. On the other hand, the good quality ones used by software
publishers in the 80's to ship their applications still seem to work well.
On
That's exactly what I mean. I understand there is no such thing as a 32
or 16 bit package, per se, but the program inside will be one or the
other - or a "fat binary" containing both.
On 10/21/2015 11:19 PM, Ulrich Hansen wrote:
> Am 22.10.2015 um 00:19 schrieb Jerome E. Shidel Jr.
>
>> I keep
ges we already have and call it a day?
>
> Mateusz
>
>
>
> On 20/10/2015 16:44, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>>> On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:47 AM, Mercury Thirteen <mercury0x0...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Greetings! My apologies for not
ort etc).
> Such version could then be used by installers that do not want to
> reimplement package format support..
>
>
> Mateusz
>
>
>
>
>
>>> On 20/10/2015 16:44, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:47 AM, Mercury Thirteen
, I just won't be able to make great strides any time soon.
On 10/20/2015 10:44 AM, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>> On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:47 AM, Mercury Thirteen <mercury0x0...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Greetings! My apologies for not answering sooner, but I was slated
h version could then be used by installers that do not want to
>> reimplement package format support..
>>
>>
>> Mateusz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> On 20/10/2015 16:44, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>>>>>> On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:47 AM, Mercury
1 - 100 of 246 matches
Mail list logo
