[Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
Johnson Lam has posted an updated 5-Jun-2015 DRIVERS.ZIP file with a single XIDE driver, in his dropbox at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/15785527/dos/file/drivers.zip XIDE is now a single driver, using a /P switch to request high-speed protected caching, also a /X switch to disable overlap of UltraDMA disk I-O with caching on an old or odd mainboard requiring this. XIDE's overlap of UltraDMA disk input with caching is also improved. Versus UIDE, the 5-Jun-2015 XIDE now offers up to 10% greater speed! Note also that my support for the old UIDE driver is now TERMINATED, due to Rugxulo's continuing MAD Dog! GRUDGE against me, that began with his following 17-Mar-2015 post on BTTR: http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/forum_entry.php?id=14140 Rugxulo is miffed that I refused to follow his ideas for upgrading my PC, after SourceForge made virtually overnight changes to their Internet security certificates, which I think was a MISTAKE!But, Rugxulo went on sending me more ideas, although I asked him at-least twice to Send me NO MORE E-Mails! If in the above post, he calls this arguing with me, Rugxulo is a LIAR!! It was only HE who was intruding on ME, and nothing more!! Rugxulo now takes EVERY chance he can to ATTACK me, as can be viewed in all his FD-User and BTTR posts since 17-Mar-2015. He is correct in only one thing: After his having recommended UIDE for years, his above post is the reason I made the new XIDE a closed-source driver. My drivers ALWAYS work, as they are always CHECKED by Johnson Lam or by Khusraw (both, if their time allows) before Johnson posts them! And if, after so long, Rugxulo now thinks he can make my using V6.22 MS-DOS into a FreeDOS driver issue, Rugxulo is Blowing SMOKE! to make himself look good, and he should be considered only as a FAKE!! I'll BE DAMNED before I merely give away any more of my sources in the face of Rugxulo's BACKSTABBING! XIDE will remain closed-source and I plan NEVER to do any more open-source work: Too many absolute FREAKS and MAD Dogs! to put-up with!! Please do NOT address any further UIDE questions/comments to me. I now regard it as defunct, and you now know why. Jack R. Ellis -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Networking: With MS Client, Error 5: Access has been denied
Thanks, but making that change did not make a difference. I have also now edited the HOSTS file to add the server there, due to what I read at ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/misc1/BUSSYS/LANMAN/KB/Q130/5/38.TXT about not being able to ping the server. So I can indeed ping the server now, but access is still denied for the net use command. On 6/14/2015 3:06 PM, TJ Edmister wrote: Did you check the NTLM compatibility mode in Vista? HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa There should be a DWORD named LmCompatibilityLevel set to value of 1 On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 13:32:34 -0400, John Hupp free...@prpcompany.com wrote: I installed MS-DOS Network Client, which successfully initializes with TCP/IP via DHCP. But when I try net use z: \\server\share and enter the password (with a user name that matches the Win Vista peer server account), I get Error 5: Access has been denied. Likewise, net view \\server yields the same error. And net view yields Error 6118: The list of servers for this workgroup is not currently available. Linux machines on the LAN connect to the server OK with the same account. I tried disabling SMB2 via a registry entry (per https://www.petri.com/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008), but this made no difference. Anyone know how to fix this? -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Networking: With MS Client, Error 5: Access has been denied
I installed MS-DOS Network Client, which successfully initializes with TCP/IP via DHCP. But when I try net use z: \\server\share and enter the password (with a user name that matches the Win Vista peer server account), I get Error 5: Access has been denied. Likewise, net view \\server yields the same error. And net view yields Error 6118: The list of servers for this workgroup is not currently available. Linux machines on the LAN connect to the server OK with the same account. I tried disabling SMB2 via a registry entry (per https://www.petri.com/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008), but this made no difference. Anyone know how to fix this? -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Networking: With MS Client, Error 5: Access has been denied
Did you check the NTLM compatibility mode in Vista? HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa There should be a DWORD named LmCompatibilityLevel set to value of 1 On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 13:32:34 -0400, John Hupp free...@prpcompany.com wrote: I installed MS-DOS Network Client, which successfully initializes with TCP/IP via DHCP. But when I try net use z: \\server\share and enter the password (with a user name that matches the Win Vista peer server account), I get Error 5: Access has been denied. Likewise, net view \\server yields the same error. And net view yields Error 6118: The list of servers for this workgroup is not currently available. Linux machines on the LAN connect to the server OK with the same account. I tried disabling SMB2 via a registry entry (per https://www.petri.com/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008), but this made no difference. Anyone know how to fix this? -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
Can someone please ban him explicitly? I know it's ironic that I spent so many hours trying to help him get back on the list. But he's neither rational nor helpful anymore. He's only following me around with his irrational anger, which is 100% unjustified. Jack, I know you think it's your right or freedom of speech or whatnot, but it is not. It's probably illegal (and definitely immoral) to constantly harass someone online. http://www.freedos.org/lists/remind.txt 1. Please don't swear. We don't want this mailing list to become what Usenet turned into. 2. Keep posts on-topic. Remember, we set up this mailing list to discuss FreeDOS issues. 3. No flame wars. If you feel really strongly against what someone has said, send a reply off-list. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Jack gykazequ...@earthlink.net wrote: Johnson Lam has posted an updated 5-Jun-2015 DRIVERS.ZIP file with a single XIDE driver, in his dropbox at: Jack, quite honestly, stop announcing your drivers over and over again. Everybody who wants them already knows where to find them. I can't even officially mirror anything closed source. This is a FreeDOS mailing list hosted by SourceForge, or have you forgotten? Closing sources to what was formerly free is the exact kind of thing that GPL hates and fights against. And I personally have no technical interest in trying your closed drivers, not after you explicitly banned FreeDOS (2007-9) in your older ones (over yet another imaginary offense that had literally nothing to do with me). XIDE is now a single driver, using a /P switch to request high-speed protected caching, also a /X switch to disable overlap of UltraDMA disk I-O with caching on an old or odd mainboard requiring this. XIDE's overlap of UltraDMA disk input with caching is also improved. Versus UIDE, the 5-Jun-2015 XIDE now offers up to 10% greater speed! This kind of technical content is what you should've kept your email pertaining to. At least then you couldn't be blamed. Anything else is highly impertinent. Note also that my support for the old UIDE driver is now TERMINATED, due to Rugxulo's continuing MAD Dog! GRUDGE against me, that began with his following 17-Mar-2015 post on BTTR: http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/forum_entry.php?id=14140 1). You explicitly told me NOT to mirror your drivers because, unless you could directly announce them on freedos-user, that you'd be done with FreeDOS. That is why I emailed you so many suggestions for workarounds and why we only had Oct-19 (drivers) until very recently. When you later definitively refused ALL help and told me you were giving up on FleaDOS and I made a choice and stop sending me emails, then and only then did Jim Hall ask me to mirror your final drivers (license permitting), aka Mar-05, which I did. (I was surprised that you were still updating them. Unlike in years past, you stopped telling me directly about new releases.) 2). I pointed to the SF.net bug tracker in case people didn't know what was going on (as private emails were not widely propagated). 3). I (indirectly) was asking rr to either reinstate you or explain why not (though he never did). 4). I was explaining why I was no longer in direct contact with you (because you refused, and not vice versa). 5). I (indirectly) was trying to get mvojvodic to test your newer drivers and report back because they didn't work for me (refused to boot on Lenovo 2011, despite no config changes since years) on FreeDOS (which you brag about not using!). But he never did. (17-Mar-2015) Rugxulo: If you want to try his latest drivers (Mar-18) [sic], grab them from his DropBox, but since he doesn't even use FreeDOS (only MS-DOS 6.22), I'm not sure if they work at all anymore: [URL] That one sentence you've considered worst betrayal, and thus you later sent me a highly insulting email (ironically cc'd to your two testers, who sadly didn't rebuke you!). But I did not share that email with others because it was indirectly offensive to them as well (maybe moreso). Some (immoral) words should not be repeated (without a very good reason). So, instead of asking the details about a full bug report (which I could not send you because you gave up on FleaDOS and said stop sending me emails and without further comments, mirror this [buggy] new release), you have instead decided it is wise to CONSTANTLY follow me around and directly insult me over and over again on what is technically a regression in your own work! (Your blaming of John Hupp's Lite-On as too old and non-standard was a copout. You had no proof, just blind devotion to your own [in]competence.) Can't you do anything right?? Rugxulo is miffed that I refused to follow his ideas for upgrading my PC, after SourceForge made virtually overnight changes to their Internet security certificates, which I think was a MISTAKE!But, Rugxulo went on sending me more ideas, although I asked him at-least twice to Send me NO MORE E-Mails! If in the
Re: [Freedos-user] Networking: With MS Client, Error 5: Access has been denied
Hi, On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 12:32 PM, John Hupp free...@prpcompany.com wrote: I installed MS-DOS Network Client, which successfully initializes with TCP/IP via DHCP. But when I try net use z: \\server\share and enter the password (with a user name that matches the Win Vista peer server account), I get Error 5: Access has been denied. ... Linux machines on the LAN connect to the server OK with the same account. I tried disabling SMB2 via a registry entry ... but this made no difference. Anyone know how to fix this? Don't use Vista ... just use Linux! :-)) (Seriously, it's not wrong to dual boot. I know you want to use DOS, which is fine, but you really might have better luck with ZipSlack/Slackware 11.0 [2006] atop UMSDOS: ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-11.0/zipslack/ ) -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Networking: With MS Client, Error 5: Access has been denied
I use to resolve this kind of problem by monitoring the network traffic; capture the traffic data on the network wen the transaction go well aand when not and compare it, in this way you can understand more, in the past i use to do in this way to resolv problems. 2015-06-14 22:22 GMT+02:00 Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com: Hi, On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 12:32 PM, John Hupp free...@prpcompany.com wrote: I installed MS-DOS Network Client, which successfully initializes with TCP/IP via DHCP. But when I try net use z: \\server\share and enter the password (with a user name that matches the Win Vista peer server account), I get Error 5: Access has been denied. ... Linux machines on the LAN connect to the server OK with the same account. I tried disabling SMB2 via a registry entry ... but this made no difference. Anyone know how to fix this? Don't use Vista ... just use Linux! :-)) (Seriously, it's not wrong to dual boot. I know you want to use DOS, which is fine, but you really might have better luck with ZipSlack/Slackware 11.0 [2006] atop UMSDOS: ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-11.0/zipslack/ ) -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Networking: With MS Client, Error 5: Access has been denied
Though my initial interest (and testing) was oriented toward moving files on the LAN, I also find that I cannot ping web sites. I get DGN0217: Remote name cannot be resolved. On 6/14/2015 6:14 PM, John Hupp wrote: Thanks, but making that change did not make a difference. I have also now edited the HOSTS file to add the server there, due to what I read at ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/misc1/BUSSYS/LANMAN/KB/Q130/5/38.TXT about not being able to ping the server. So I can indeed ping the server now, but access is still denied for the net use command. On 6/14/2015 3:06 PM, TJ Edmister wrote: Did you check the NTLM compatibility mode in Vista? HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa There should be a DWORD named LmCompatibilityLevel set to value of 1 On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 13:32:34 -0400, John Hupp free...@prpcompany.com wrote: I installed MS-DOS Network Client, which successfully initializes with TCP/IP via DHCP. But when I try net use z: \\server\share and enter the password (with a user name that matches the Win Vista peer server account), I get Error 5: Access has been denied. Likewise, net view \\server yields the same error. And net view yields Error 6118: The list of servers for this workgroup is not currently available. Linux machines on the LAN connect to the server OK with the same account. I tried disabling SMB2 via a registry entry (per https://www.petri.com/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008), but this made no difference. Anyone know how to fix this? -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
Hi Thomas, Sad to see UIDE/XIDE switching to closed-source, undermining my interest in FreeDOS for anything beyond low-level access to hardware and spreadsheets with Quattro Pro 5 for DOS (already migrating to Gnumeric). This is the first I've heard about any feud between Rugxulo and Jack Ellis. I don't intend to get involved in any family feuds! Well Jack usually has clear plans and opinions, even if they clash with strong wrong-doers: E.g. Sourceforge dropping most SSL compatibility with older browsers - instead of grudgingly using another browser, he rather avoids SF. And at some point, Rugxulo got fed up with discussions. And judging by Rugxulo's posts on this list and on BTTR, this has somewhat escalated. However, both men are still helpful for uninvolved people... I was never able to read a CD or DVD on new computer, SATA drive; all I'd get was the title, but file directory never showed. If you got the title but no content, maybe they were UDF rather than ISO9660 formatted. Normal MSCDEX style drivers such as our SHSUCDX do not support that, but I guess there are experimental drivers for UDF content :-) Note that this is UIDE-unrelated. If something like UIDE/XIDE were switched to closed-source in Linux, BSD or Haiku, there'd be many other developers to fill in the gap ... or of course just start with an older still open source UIDE and help by maintaining your own open source branch. This will be lower quality than XIDE, but if you need open source, XIDE might not be an option for you. I might also say that if Net-Tamer (http://www.nettamer.net/tamer.html) were released to open-source instead of languishing with no further update since 1999, there might have been potential for development and improvement... Possible. Luckily there are a few more modern open source browsers which have been ported to DOS now :-) Switching from MBR partitioning to GPT means I can install FreeDOS only to USB stick, and pretty much prevents anything serious with ReactOS. In particular for ReactOS, I would say that adding GPT support is supposed to be no real problem. Even for DOS I am optimistic. But maybe ReactOS considers itself to be unstable and therefore does deliberately avoid being too brave in harddisk access? It might be designed more for being tested and less for taking the risky (?) step of interacting with your other operating systems user data. Regards, Eric -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
Mateusz and Eric, my Thanks for your comments, which I respect. But I will not accept undeserved attacks on me and my work. So, my decision stands, that XIDE and other software from me will now be closed-source. Re: the REST of what was posted on FD-User today, Sunday 14-Jun-2015: * I know it's ironic that I spent so many hours trying to help him get * back on the list ... MY decision and MY RESPONSIBILITY that I feel SourceForge made a MISTAKE in their overnight Internet certificate changes. Who is Rugxulo that I MUST LISTEN to his ideas! I had to tell him TWICE to STOP sending me any more E-Mails! So he took what was essentially a PRIVATE matter onto a PUBLIC forum, in his 17-Mar-2015 BTTR post. In any case, as one can see from my posting on FD-User again, it was not necessary to upgrade. I could have ignored all by Rugxulo or Zangune (SourceForge), merely used my intuition, and I would have been able to post here again MUCH sooner! * I can't even officially mirror anything closed source. This is a * FreeDOS mailing list hosted by SourceForge, or have you forgotten? I have not forgotten, and in fact I never asked you to mirror any of my drivers. After all of this, I would be absolutely delighted, if FreeDOS, IBiblio or whoever DID delete every one of my driver files! * You explicitly told me NOT to mirror your drivers because, unless * you could directly announce them on freedos-user, that you'd be done * with FreeDOS. Correct, since their are always technical details re: my drivers that only I can explain. Without being able to post on FD-User, I cannot give such explanations, and that says I would be done with FreeDOS! * I (indirectly) was asking rr to either reinstate you or explain * why not (though he never did). The above is the first I ever heard of that! Robert Riebisch of BTTR did write me that he had begun work at a new job and is very busy. I was unable to read an attachment he sent, in his inquiry re: getting me back on BTTR, and I have not heard from him since, just like others to whom he has not replied. From my 35 years in software, I am aware of just how demanding and mercenary such jobs can be. * I (indirectly) was trying to get mvojvodic to test your newer * drivers and report back because they didn't work for me (refused to * boot on Lenovo 2011 ... The above is the first I ever heard of that, as well! Although I was tired of Rugxulo's never-ending upgrade-Upgrade-UPGRADE E-Mails, did he really believe I would not have listened to a SERIOUS bug comment about a PC-compatible system? I surely WOULD have! * (08-Dec-2014) Jim Hall: I see Jack has got you involved on this too. * He's becoming very abusive (again) and I find that tiring. I'm not * going to put up with it. ABSOLUTELY the first I ever heard of THAT! Then why did Jim Hall not write to ME in December, nor answer at-all the E-Mail which I sent him last Monday, 8-Jun-2015? His total lack of response this week is why I chose to make yesterday's FD-User post, so users WOULD know what was going on. * Jack, you didn't want to spend any money to upgrade ... Absolutely NOT Rugxulo's BUSINESS, whether or not I upgrade! Who is HE that I MUST listen to his ideas, and what if his ideas proved to be flatly UNNECESSARY, as I noted above! ** My drivers ALWAYS work, as they are always CHECKED by Johnson Lam or ** by Khusraw (both, if their time allows) before Johnson posts them! * * Two whole testers? Out of 8 billion people? Wow, I'll bet even * Microsoft is jealous. They positively SHOULD be!! Lucho told me in 2008, when I asked how UIDE compared in speed to his Windows, You beat THEM, 2 months ago! That was long before any of XIDE's upgrades; and XIDE is still only a 5K run-time driver using NO interrupts and providing up to 4-Gigabyte caches! Gazillion-byte drivers in C were never-Never NECESSARY!! I shall continue to rely on Johnson's 11 years and Khusraws 8 years of test results. They value and comment about my drivers.Others on BTTR and FD-User almost NEVER say anything. * Jack ... I hope Jim Hall removes every ounce of work you've ever * done for FreeDOS. I hope he deletes it all from BASE, iBiblio * mirror, and everything else ... So do I. My drivers were not designed solely for FreeDOS but for any DOS system. The fact that they DID end up on IBiblio was not my doing nor really my desire. Jim Hall is absolutely free to be rid of every one of my driver files from 2004, any time he wishes! But I know he will NOT do it, for the same reasons as before: Jim is DESPERATE not to lose software that WORKS! Can anyone imagine how much SLOWER FreeDOS would be, without UIDE? If you want to SEE how much slower, try having FreeDOS copy a full CD to one disk file with XCOPY, in protected mode using JEMM386, both with and without my drivers. You should note about a 4 to 1 speed difference in favor of using UIDE, or around 10 to 1 if your BIOS cannot permit disk
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
Sad to see UIDE/XIDE switching to closed-source, undermining my interest in FreeDOS for anything beyond low-level access to hardware and spreadsheets with Quattro Pro 5 for DOS (already migrating to Gnumeric). This is the first I've heard about any feud between Rugxulo and Jack Ellis. I don't intend to get involved in any family feuds! I was never able to read a CD or DVD on new computer, SATA drive; all I'd get was the title, but file directory never showed. I find it easier to build and install FreeBSD and NetBSD from source than install FreeDOS 1.1, and much more functional. I still haven't configured network access with FreeDOS, since newer Ethernet chips don't include DOS packet drivers. If something like UIDE/XIDE were switched to closed-source in Linux, BSD or Haiku, there'd be many other developers to fill in the gap, and more sense of community. I might also say that if Net-Tamer (http://www.nettamer.net/tamer.html) were released to open-source instead of languishing with no further update since 1999, there might have been potential for development and improvement, but now figures to be many years too late considering other open-source browsers for Linux/Unix so much further developed. Switching from MBR partitioning to GPT means I can install FreeDOS only to USB stick, and pretty much prevents anything serious with ReactOS. Tom -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Drivers or tips for 3 ISA sound cards?
On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 10:39 -0400, John Hupp wrote: On 5/30/2015 4:29 PM, John Hupp wrote: I have 3 old ISA sound cards that I was trying to get working in an a useful search term is ABANDONWARE. Sometimes exploring that can reveal hidden treasure. CWSIV -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Jack gykazequ...@earthlink.net wrote: [SNIP] If you want to SEE how much slower, try having FreeDOS copy a full CD to one disk file with XCOPY, in protected mode using JEMM386, both with and without my drivers. You should note about a 4 to 1 speed difference in favor of using UIDE, or around 10 to 1 if your BIOS cannot permit disk UltraDMA when in protected-mode! And if you REALLY want better times, try the same copy using V6.22 or V7.10 MS-DOS, in real- OR in protected-mode. Should run about 3 times faster again! I HAVE done all of that, which is quite a LARGE reason why I still use V6.22 MS-DOS! [SNIP] Jack, Do you have a test suite that could reproduce that performance result? Would you release that test suite? -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
Hi Eric, If Jack Ellis has switched open-source UIDE to closed-source XIDE, what will be for FreeDOS 1.2 or 2.0? I believe FreeDOS 1.2 or 2.0 has to be open-source? I was never able to read a CD or DVD on new computer, SATA drive; all I'd get was the title, but file directory never showed. If you got the title but no content, maybe they were UDF rather than ISO9660 formatted. Normal MSCDEX style drivers such as our SHSUCDX do not support that, but I guess there are experimental drivers for UDF content :-) Note that this is UIDE-unrelated. Now I could retry FreeDOS 1.1 on USB stick to see if it can read CDs or DVDs. I have some I burned, some where I made the iso with mkisofs. There is also an outdated FreeDOS floppy image on the System Rescue CD. I though nonreadability was related to SATA, didn't think of UDF. By the way, Seagate Business Storage DVD is recognized but can't be read by FreeBSD or NetBSD, but can be read by Linux (System Rescue CD) and Haiku R1Alpha4 (November 2012). If something like UIDE/XIDE were switched to closed-source in Linux, BSD or Haiku, there'd be many other developers to fill in the gap ... or of course just start with an older still open source UIDE and help by maintaining your own open source branch. This will be lower quality than XIDE, but if you need open source, XIDE might not be an option for you. I might also say that if Net-Tamer (http://www.nettamer.net/tamer.html) were released to open-source instead of languishing with no further update since 1999, there might have been potential for development and improvement... Possible. Luckily there are a few more modern open source browsers which have been ported to DOS now :-) I can think of Links and Dillo among graphical browsers. Switching from MBR partitioning to GPT means I can install FreeDOS only to USB stick, and pretty much prevents anything serious with ReactOS. In particular for ReactOS, I would say that adding GPT support is supposed to be no real problem. Even for DOS I am optimistic. But maybe ReactOS considers itself to be unstable and therefore does deliberately avoid being too brave in harddisk access? It might be designed more for being tested and less for taking the risky (?) step of interacting with your other operating systems user data. There is the danger what an OS with buggy GPT support will do to the rest of the disk, will it run amok and overrun other OS installations and user data partitions? On running amok and overrunning other partitions, that happened to me in the single-digit days of April 2001 with OS/2 Warp 4 with CHKDSK running automatically on reboot after a system freeze. That was not GPT, and OS/2 Warp 4 was IBM-proprietary. Also OpenBSD, as of their latest release (5.7), did not support GPT, though they might be working on it. FreeDOS FDISK on installation program makes me very nervous, DOS FDISK always made me nervous. I preferred OS/2 FDISK prior to April 2001, subsequently Linux fdisk. Tom -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Networking: With MS Client, Error 5: Access has been denied
Be sure that you have a good IP, gateway, and DNS setting from your DHCP server. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 3:37 PM, John Hupp free...@prpcompany.com wrote: Though my initial interest (and testing) was oriented toward moving files on the LAN, I also find that I cannot ping web sites. I get DGN0217: Remote name cannot be resolved. On 6/14/2015 6:14 PM, John Hupp wrote: Thanks, but making that change did not make a difference. I have also now edited the HOSTS file to add the server there, due to what I read at ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/misc1/BUSSYS/LANMAN/KB/Q130/5/38.TXT about not being able to ping the server. So I can indeed ping the server now, but access is still denied for the net use command. On 6/14/2015 3:06 PM, TJ Edmister wrote: Did you check the NTLM compatibility mode in Vista? HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa There should be a DWORD named LmCompatibilityLevel set to value of 1 On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 13:32:34 -0400, John Hupp free...@prpcompany.com wrote: I installed MS-DOS Network Client, which successfully initializes with TCP/IP via DHCP. But when I try net use z: \\server\share and enter the password (with a user name that matches the Win Vista peer server account), I get Error 5: Access has been denied. Likewise, net view \\server yields the same error. And net view yields Error 6118: The list of servers for this workgroup is not currently available. Linux machines on the LAN connect to the server OK with the same account. I tried disabling SMB2 via a registry entry (per https://www.petri.com/how-to-disable-smb-2-on-windows-vista-or-server-2008), but this made no difference. Anyone know how to fix this? -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
On 6/14/2015 9:00 PM, Thomas Mueller wrote: Hi Eric, If Jack Ellis has switched open-source UIDE to closed-source XIDE, what will be for FreeDOS 1.2 or 2.0? No one is forced to use XIDE, UIDE will do just fine (or so Jack says)... Ralf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] XIDE Updated; UIDE Support TERMINATED!
Hi Jack, On 14/06/2015 08:12, Jack wrote: Note also that my support for the old UIDE driver is now TERMINATED, due to Rugxulo's continuing MAD Dog! GRUDGE against me, that began with his following 17-Mar-2015 post on BTTR: I don't know you, and don't know the details of your history with Rugxulo (and I'm honestly not interested in knowing them). I understand that you don't wish to develop your drivers under an open license anymore, and that's of course your right. I can only be sad about this. But please stop bringing up your issues with Rugxulo - it's not only a waste of bandwidth for everyone, but also makes you look, well.. childish. Which I am sure you are not. Same remarks go to Rugxulo of course - guys, if you don't want to talk to each other, just don't, but stop involving everyone around in your marriage issues. Jack, it's really sad that you decided to close your drivers away from the FreeDOS community only because you and Rugxulo don't go along. But again, it's obviously your perfect right and I totally respect it. My drivers ALWAYS work, as they are always CHECKED by Johnson Lam or by Khusraw (both, if their time allows) before Johnson posts them! While I don't have any doubts in your remarkable programming skills (far above whatever I could come up with, for sure!), you must be aware that there is no software without bugs, and that the fact that your drivers work for one or two people means only that. There are thousands of various PC systems out there, with at least as many different software configurations. You can't possibly know that your software won't break on one of them. And that's precisely the reason why almost no one is interested in closed software - even if it works splendidly most of the time (like your drivers do), because the one time it will fail, there will be no chance to fix it if you're not around (yes, I know that someone else fixing low-level DOS drivers is unlikely, but still the general principle holds). cheers, Mateusz -- ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
