Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Hello Bret Johnson, That's why I referred to both "playing" and "listening" in my original statement -- I did that on purpose. The _purpose_ of music is to be heard, not to merely be played (e.g., when no one is listening). The musicians are in fact deciding who can and can't listen to their music -- essentially saying, "If you believe differently than me and _I_ think you might interpret my music to mean something other than how _I_ want you to interpret it, then you can't listen to it." They have special words to describe non-musicians (like politicians) who try to do the same thing, and those words are not flattering. I do not recall any legal doctrine that says that I somehow have an inherent "right" or "freedom" to listen to, say, Beyonce's latest album, without paying anything to her and without her agreeing to it in any sense whatsoever. The whole issue is not about with "interpretation" or "belief" or whatever fluffy concept du jour. It is about having clear rules about when and how people can share and distribute stuff, and abiding by these rules. Perhaps you may disagree about which rules are good and which rules are bad... but surely we can agree that there need to be _some_ rules, and that the rules should be clear. Just my 2 cents. Thank you! -- https://gitlab.com/tkchia :: https://github.com/tkchia ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
>> For example, I know it's a big deal these days for musicians to >> claim that somebody who disagrees with their politics can't play >> their songs (at things like political rallies). Basically, they're >> declaring who can and can't listen to their music. > It's not who can or can't listen, but who can or can't play that > music for an audience. And usually it forms a link in the heads of > the listeners between the one who chose to play the tape and the > artist, almost as if the artist supports or endorses the political > rally for instance. That's why I referred to both "playing" and "listening" in my original statement -- I did that on purpose. The _purpose_ of music is to be heard, not to merely be played (e.g., when no one is listening). The musicians are in fact deciding who can and can't listen to their music -- essentially saying, "If you believe differently than me and _I_ think you might interpret my music to mean something other than how _I_ want you to interpret it, then you can't listen to it." They have special words to describe non-musicians (like politicians) who try to do the same thing, and those words are not flattering. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Hi all, When it comes to releasing something as public domain, I think “The Unlicense” (aka CC0) is a great choice and maintains the spirit of public domain. Basically it says, do whatever you want with it. But, don’t blame me if it doesn’t work or breaks something. https://opensource.org/licenses/Unlicense It is also a recognized open source license. :-) ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 2:38 PM Robert Riebisch wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> > The Creative Commons have identified a "CC-0" ("Creative Commons
> > Zero") that indicates "no rights reserved" that does the same thing.
> > https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/
>
> May I apply CC0 to computer software? If so, is there a recommended
> implementation?
> https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ#May_I_apply_CC0_to_computer_software.3F_If_so.2C_is_there_a_recommended_implementation.3F
>
The Open Source Initiative also says this (2017) about public domain:
https://opensource.org/node/878
[..]
> Plenty of people assume that public domain software must be open
> source. While it may be free software within your specific context, it
> is incorrect to treat public domain software as open source or indeed as
> globally free software. That’s not a legal opinion (I’m not a lawyer
> so only entitled to layman’s opinions) but rather an observation that
> an open source user or developer cannot safely include public domain
> source code in a project.
>
[..]
> “Public Domain” means software (or indeed anything else that could
> be copyrighted) that is not restricted by copyright. It may be this way
> because the copyright has expired, or because the person entitled to
> control the copyright has disclaimed that right. Disclaiming copyright
> is only possible in some countries, and copyright expiration happens
> at different times in different jurisdictions (and usually after such
> a long time as to be irrelevant for software). As a consequence, it’s
> impossible to make a globally applicable statement that a certain piece
> of software is in the public domain.
[..]
Best to use a recognized open source license, instead of trying to
declare it as "public domain." I linked to several popular open source
licenses in my other email, such as MIT or BSD.
Jim
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Hi Jim,
> The Creative Commons have identified a "CC-0" ("Creative Commons
> Zero") that indicates "no rights reserved" that does the same thing.
> https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/
May I apply CC0 to computer software? If so, is there a recommended
implementation?
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/CC0_FAQ#May_I_apply_CC0_to_computer_software.3F_If_so.2C_is_there_a_recommended_implementation.3F
Cheers,
Robert
--
BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 1:33 PM Bret Johnson wrote:
>
> I'll try to search for an appropriate license and e-mail it to
> you. I've been searching though a little bit of licensing info and
> really didn't know that even declaring that something is "public domain"
> doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means. I suspect it may
> ultimately have something to do with the lawyers needing SOMEBODY to
> go after when something goes wrong -- declaring it to be public domain
> doesn't necessarily get you completely "off the hook". I know Jim
> has a significant concern over these kinds of things since he is the
> "face" of FreeDOS.
>[..]
Yes, "public domain" is a tricky thing. I'm not sure when that
changed, but it used to be that you could write a simple statement
saying "I don't care about this, and I release it into the public
domain" and that was fine. Even the FSF folks used to recommend this
for trivial code, in the early 1990s.
The Creative Commons have identified a "CC-0" ("Creative Commons
Zero") that indicates "no rights reserved" that does the same thing.
https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/public-domain/cc0/
A few open source licenses are popular these days. In no particular order:
MIT - a short license that is pretty broad. I usually release my
"demo" code under this license.
https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
BSD - comes in a few "flavors," the most common seems to be the
3-clause license:
https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause
GNU GPL - a long license, essentially guaranteeing that the source
code can never be made "closed source" or "proprietary." The GNU GPL
v3 is the latest version, and includes new clauses intended to prevent
what the FSF folks call "Tivo-ization." I prefer the GNU GPL v2, which
I find easier to read: (be careful with the "How to Apply These Terms
to Your New Programs" section, as the suggested text says "either
version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version" which
means someone can choose to re-release your GNU GPL v2 project under
the GNU GPL v3. That's fine for some, but I prefer to keep GNU GPL v2
only, so now I say "GNU GPL v2 only" in any code I release under the
GNU GPL v2.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
Apache 2.0 - another long license
https://opensource.org/licenses/Apache-2.0
___
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
On Mon, 29 Aug 2022, Bret Johnson wrote: I'll try to search for an appropriate license and e-mail it to you. I've been searching though a little bit of licensing info and really didn't know that even declaring that something is "public domain" doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means. I suspect it may ultimately have something to do with the lawyers needing SOMEBODY to go after when something goes wrong -- declaring it to be public domain doesn't necessarily get you completely "off the hook". I know Jim has a significant concern over these kinds of things since he is the "face" of FreeDOS. We could end up having a long discussion about this (and it might even be worthwhile, or at least entertaining), but it seems to me as though legally they try to classify software as simply another "branch" of writing, with the other major branches being books and music. While they all certainly have "creative" aspects to them and can be "plagiarized" in some sense, they really are different animals and pretending they are the same (even if only in a legal sense) really doesn't seem very logical. Of course, legality and logic don't necessarily need to have anything to do with each other. For example, I know it's a big deal these days for musicians to claim that somebody who disagrees with their politics can't play their songs (at things like political rallies). Basically, they're declaring who can and can't listen to their music. This would be equivalent to book-banning by an author -- the author of a book saying who can and can't read it, or a programmer declaring who can't and can't use their software (even if they pay for it). We're living in a funny world. This is why I use UIUC (for a longer license) or MIT/MIT0 (for a shorter one). Something like this (basically a "MIT0") is just 3 sentences and grants effectively the same rights that would be intended by a "public domain" dedication. This is the UIUC license with the three conditions removed: "Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the 'Software'), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so. "THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED 'AS IS', WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE CONTRIBUTORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS WITH THE SOFTWARE." There's other ways to word it that would also work. -uso. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
I'll try to search for an appropriate license and e-mail it to you. I've been searching though a little bit of licensing info and really didn't know that even declaring that something is "public domain" doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means. I suspect it may ultimately have something to do with the lawyers needing SOMEBODY to go after when something goes wrong -- declaring it to be public domain doesn't necessarily get you completely "off the hook". I know Jim has a significant concern over these kinds of things since he is the "face" of FreeDOS. We could end up having a long discussion about this (and it might even be worthwhile, or at least entertaining), but it seems to me as though legally they try to classify software as simply another "branch" of writing, with the other major branches being books and music. While they all certainly have "creative" aspects to them and can be "plagiarized" in some sense, they really are different animals and pretending they are the same (even if only in a legal sense) really doesn't seem very logical. Of course, legality and logic don't necessarily need to have anything to do with each other. For example, I know it's a big deal these days for musicians to claim that somebody who disagrees with their politics can't play their songs (at things like political rallies). Basically, they're declaring who can and can't listen to their music. This would be equivalent to book-banning by an author -- the author of a book saying who can and can't read it, or a programmer declaring who can't and can't use their software (even if they pay for it). We're living in a funny world. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
You can attach a license statement to it (such as cc0 public domain, or MIT, or whatever) and email me (off list) a zip file. I can post this on the FreeDOS files archive at Ibibio. On Sun, Aug 28, 2022, 8:10 PM Bret Johnson wrote: > I don't use SourceForge or GitHib or anything like that. The source is in > A86 (actually, A386 since there some Pentium-specific instructions). One > of the things I was going to do before releasing it was to convert it to > NASM. That takes quite a bit of work and time that I don't have right > now. It's also not in good enough shape (I don't yet consider it "ready > for prime time") that I am willing to host it on my own web site. > > I would consider it public domain so it doesn't need any kind of special > license -- there's nothing really special or proprietary in there (most of > the info came from RBIL). I can send it to somebody if they want to host > it themselves and edit/modify it. I can also just do something like attach > the executable file (and/or source) to an e-mail like this one and anybody > can do with it as they want. > > > ___ > Freedos-devel mailing list > Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel > ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
I don't use SourceForge or GitHib or anything like that. The source is in A86 (actually, A386 since there some Pentium-specific instructions). One of the things I was going to do before releasing it was to convert it to NASM. That takes quite a bit of work and time that I don't have right now. It's also not in good enough shape (I don't yet consider it "ready for prime time") that I am willing to host it on my own web site. I would consider it public domain so it doesn't need any kind of special license -- there's nothing really special or proprietary in there (most of the info came from RBIL). I can send it to somebody if they want to host it themselves and edit/modify it. I can also just do something like attach the executable file (and/or source) to an e-mail like this one and anybody can do with it as they want. ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022, 9:42 AM Bret Johnson wrote: > I have a program but have never officially released called ISLOADED which > I can upload/email to whoever wants to use/see it (including the source > code). It tests for lots of things like video, serial/parallel ports, > ANSI, DPMI/DPMS/VCPI, mouse driver, character device drivers (by name), > etc. It is designed specifically to be used in batch files by returning an > ErrorLevel -- 0 if the thing being tested is installed/loaded and 1 if it > is not. > > If you're asking about more than one thing at a time, it returns > ErrorLevel 255. For example, if you want to know if the video is > compatible with VGA, "ISLOADED VGA" will return ErrorLevel 0 if it is > compatible with VGA and 1 if it isn't. "ISLOADED VideoCard" will return > ErrorLevel 255 no matter what type of video card you have, but will also > display on the screen what type of video card you have (e.g., it will tell > you it is a VGA). > > ISLOADED also includes CPU tests (specifically 80286, 80386, ..., 80686). > The CPU tests are an "equal to or greater than" type of test. E.g., > "ISLOADED 80286" will return true (ErrorLevel 0) if the CPU is AT LEAST an > 80286, 1 if it is an 8086/8088/80186. "ISLOADED CPU" will return > ErrorLevel 255 but will display on the screen the type of CPU. > > There is no documentation for ISLOADED (part of the reason I've never > released it). "ISLOADED" (with no options) provides a basic help screen > which includes a list of all the different things that can be tested. > > Is anybody interested? > Interesting. I'd like to see it, if you release it under an open source license somewhere. Could you put it on GitHub or GitLab or SourceForge or... and share the link here? > ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
I have a program but have never officially released called ISLOADED which I can upload/email to whoever wants to use/see it (including the source code). It tests for lots of things like video, serial/parallel ports, ANSI, DPMI/DPMS/VCPI, mouse driver, character device drivers (by name), etc. It is designed specifically to be used in batch files by returning an ErrorLevel -- 0 if the thing being tested is installed/loaded and 1 if it is not. If you're asking about more than one thing at a time, it returns ErrorLevel 255. For example, if you want to know if the video is compatible with VGA, "ISLOADED VGA" will return ErrorLevel 0 if it is compatible with VGA and 1 if it isn't. "ISLOADED VideoCard" will return ErrorLevel 255 no matter what type of video card you have, but will also display on the screen what type of video card you have (e.g., it will tell you it is a VGA). ISLOADED also includes CPU tests (specifically 80286, 80386, ..., 80686). The CPU tests are an "equal to or greater than" type of test. E.g., "ISLOADED 80286" will return true (ErrorLevel 0) if the CPU is AT LEAST an 80286, 1 if it is an 8086/8088/80186. "ISLOADED CPU" will return ErrorLevel 255 but will display on the screen the type of CPU. There is no documentation for ISLOADED (part of the reason I've never released it). "ISLOADED" (with no options) provides a basic help screen which includes a list of all the different things that can be tested. Is anybody interested? ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Hi, On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 1:27 PM Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote: > > Following the modification of my idea proposed by Tom: run edit32 on 386+ > else run edit... BTW thanks Tom! I believe CC386 had a 386+ text editor also using D-Flat. > I have been looking a bit for a simple program that would identify > approximate CPU and return it as an error code that batch file could used. > I did not found that (especially with free license)... so that I am thinking > about writing one. > Just asking if that exist already here. Eric Auer wrote this one years ago: * https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/util/system/cpulevel/ ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Have you tried pcem? https://pcem-emulator.co.uk/ Emulates cpus, video cards and more !! El vie, 26 ago 2022 a las 21:01, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel (< freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>) escribió: > Thanks Jim about VINFO /m to detect CPU! > I did not knew it, or at least I had totally forgotten it. > > The sad part of it, is that it is so fancy that one cannot use virtual > machines to test different CPUs, because it detects the virtual machine > rather than the virtual CPU. > > So that Eduardo's one might be more what I want to use... I'll have to try. > > > > > > > ___ > Freedos-devel mailing list > Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel > ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Thanks Jim about VINFO /m to detect CPU! I did not knew it, or at least I had totally forgotten it. The sad part of it, is that it is so fancy that one cannot use virtual machines to test different CPUs, because it detects the virtual machine rather than the virtual CPU. So that Eduardo's one might be more what I want to use... I'll have to try.___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 1:27 PM Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote: > > Following the modification of my idea proposed by Tom: run edit32 on > 386+ else run edit... BTW thanks Tom! I have been looking a bit for > a simple program that would identify approximate CPU and return it > as an error code that batch file could used. I did not found that > (especially with free license)... so that I am thinking about writing > one. Just asking if that exist already here. > You can use VINFO, part of Jerome's V8 Power Tools, which is installed as part of FreeDOS. >/M Return Machine Type (This may break on future platforms) >Returns these exit codes: >0 - Unknown, Normal or Native 8086 Hardware. >1 - 80186 >2 - 80286 >3 - 80386 >4 - 80486 >5 - 80586 >6 - 80686 or better > 101 - DOSBox. > 102 - QEMU. > 103 - VirtualBox. > 104 - VMware. > 200 - General, other emulator detected. For example, if I boot FreeDOS in VirtualBox and run the following TEST.BAT file, I get 103, indicating VirtualBox: @echo off vinfo /m echo %ERRORLEVEL% If I boot FreeDOS in QEMU and run the same TEST.BAT file, I get 102, indicating QEMU. Jim ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Hi Paul, I've just put this together with the cpu identification code I use in vmsmount. Tested only in a 386, I don't have an 8086 emulator at hand. https://github.com/eduardocasino/cpucheck.git Cheers, Eduardo El vie, 26 ago 2022 a las 20:26, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel (< freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>) escribió: > Following the modification of my idea proposed by Tom: run edit32 on 386+ > else run edit... BTW thanks Tom! > I have been looking a bit for a simple program that would identify > approximate CPU and return it as an error code that batch file could used. > I did not found that (especially with free license)... so that I am > thinking about writing one. > Just asking if that exist already here. > > ___ > Freedos-devel mailing list > Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel > ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
[Freedos-devel] No simple cpu identification program returning an error code as an answer?
Following the modification of my idea proposed by Tom: run edit32 on 386+ else run edit... BTW thanks Tom! I have been looking a bit for a simple program that would identify approximate CPU and return it as an error code that batch file could used. I did not found that (especially with free license)... so that I am thinking about writing one. Just asking if that exist already here.___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
