Re: [Freedos-user] To install FreeDOS by using floppy disks only?

[Samuel V. via Freedos-user]

You can get another compatible laptop with CD just for installations.

You can have many disks and just plug the one you need like a game cartridge.

You can just run FORMAT /S to copy a minimal FreeDOS bootable system, then copy 
other programs with a laptop ATA USB enclosure.


On Thu, 5/23/19, Csányi Pál  wrote:

 Subject: [Freedos-user] To install FreeDOS by using floppy disks only?
 To: "FreeDOS" 
 Date: Thursday, May 23, 2019, 12:34 PM
 
 Hi,
 
 I have an old laptop on which the
 CD drive is faulty so can't be used to
 install FreeDos to the 4 GB HDD
 out there.
 The USB stick can't be used either
 because this hardware can't be
 booted from the USB.
 It has FDD so can I install the FreeDos
 by using floppy disks only?
 
 It can be booted from the FDD only at
 present.
 The HDD does not have any bootable
 system on it.
 
 Can I isntall on this machine the
 FreeDOS by using floppy disks only?
 
 -- 
 Best, Pali
 
 
 ___
 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] Would you use a native 32/64-bit FreeDOS/BIOS system?

[Samuel V. via Freedos-user]

Re: Would you use a native 32/64-bit FreeDOS/BIOS system?


http://sourceforge.net/u/udocproject/profile/
I have written a few Assembly code snippets that will be helpful. I should 
probably talk in the development list to see how to think up 32/64-bit native 
implementations.

For example, I have a project called x86 Portable, which allows to reuse the 
exact same assembly code across 16/32/64-bit modes. It is done by simply 
defining register-width-dependent data types like wideword, which will become 
16, 32 or 64-bit in size according to the target CPU mode.

It also includes portabilized assembly functions like movswide which will 
translate into movsw, movsd or movsq depending on the target CPU mode.

That project can be very valuable to implement FreeDOS/BIOS portably across 32 
and 64 bits.

I've also thought that to make the system even more portable, only fully 
standard C language features should be used so that the code can be compiled 
with Borland, GCC, Open Watcom or Visual Studio, and at most C++, but using 
only what could be considered old C or C++, because it will be needed to make 
the system portable across compilers to make it easily self-compiling.

The original FreeDOS could be used as the boot loader with a shell as long as a 
machine has a BIOS, and it in turn could be used to start the 32 or 64-bit 
system, and also will work for being able to return from 32, and maybe 64-bit, 
back to FreeDOS in Real Mode.

Multitasking and protection could be loaded modularly since it's DOS and it 
would work as an operating system that allows full access to the machine, so 
more complex or protective features would probably be better implemented as 
container applications, layers, drivers, modules, but not forcefully always 
loaded by default.

Talking about development, implementing FreeDOS for 32 and 64 bits natively 
could be relatively simple, apart from the work of adapting and writing 
portable C code that only uses simple language features present in all versions 
of the language.

For example, providing DOS-style structures, DOS and BIOS calls, would only be 
a matter of extending all fields, from 8 or 16 bits, to always the register 
width of the target CPU mode.

For example if a BIOS field is now 8 bits, for example for CHS or LBA, in the 
32-bit version it would need to be 32-bit and 64-bit for the 64-bit version, 
unless things like handling wider fields in software or with the FPU is 
integrated in the OS.

In the case of disks, the LBA value would need to be up to 48 bits, or 28 bits, 
because that's what the ATA standard says, so software would need to be able to 
handle 48-bit integers for disks, and probably there will be other cases where 
32-bit code will need to handle numbers bigger than 32-bit in software.

That would be the basic idea, extending small fields to the full register width 
portably. It will surely allow using the same style of BIOS/DOS calls for 
example for much bigger LBA or CHS values.

So the current FreeDOS could be used to boot and to return from 32/64-bit 
modes, and 16-bit programs could be virtualized while running in 32/64-bit 
mode, so it would be useful.

It would be a matter to dedicate 1 year for each key task in the system per 
developer or sub-group of developers.
I've proven to myself that it would be a very fast way to investigate and have 
ready things like better IDE/SATA detection, implementing file systems, 
networking, support for running native vendor drivers, the core base 
implementation to 32/64-bit; each of those things taking 1 year to be well 
implemented into FreeDOS, if possible, with sub-teams working in parallel to 
get more features.

   --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Would you use a native 32/64-bit FreeDOS/BIOS system?

[Samuel V. via Freedos-user]

I was thinking that it could become necessary to start implementing a FreeDOS 
version that included natively its own BIOS, and that this combination of 
FreeDOS/BIOS is implemented entirely native as 32 or 64-bit code, to keep using 
the known DOS environment, the same DOS/BIOS INT calls programming style (now 
also with other ways to call services), but extending everything to more modern 
CPU modes.
The intention is to update FreeDOS and the BIOS to 32 and 64-bit modes, without 
forgetting the original 16-bit version, but now giving native access to 
features that DOS would benefit from, but that aren't available in Real Mode, 
like many Gigabytes of RAM, large IDE/SATA hard disks, more capable drivers, 
more file systems.
Would you use a FreeDOS version that was entirely native to 32 or 64 bits?
I've thought that it would be a great additional project and that it would 
definitely make FreeDOS and DOS in general, along with an integrated BIOS, live 
as a valid OS choice for any user as long as there are PCs, at least x86 ones.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] challenging dos question.

[Samuel V. via Freedos-user]

You can also use the following to make the file show normally:
attrib FILE.NAM -s -h -r
or 

attrib * -s -h -rattrib *.* -s -h -r
 

On Saturday, December 2, 2017 1:09 PM, dmccunney 
 wrote:
 

 On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Karen Lewellen  
wrote:
> Hi folks,
> its complicated.  However, is there a way to copy over a file that is
> technically hidden?
> having  a bit of a computer crisis.

DOS recognizes four file attributes: archive, read-only, hidden, and
system.  The ATTRIB command should allow you to diddle them.

See https://www.computerhope.com/attribhl.htm

Hidden simply means the file doesn't show in a DIR list, but I don't
recall it preventing copying over it.  If it's also read-only, you'll
get a permission denied error.

Offhand, you should be able to run ATTRIB, clear the read-only and
hidden attributes, copy over the file, than restore read-only and
hidden if desired.

> thanks,
> Kare
__
Dennis

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


   --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Fw: upgrade my PC from FD 1.1 to FD 1.2

[Samuel V. via Freedos-user]

Yes, it would only upgrade the kernel and the console.
DOS and FreeDOS are customizable enough as to allow for upgrading only the 
programs, drivers and other components individually as they are needed.
I always replace individual components instead of updating the whole set of 
binaries. Actually, I frequently use the versions of the binaries I want, 
packed in subdirectories as applications made from many different executables.
Using the formal distribution to update fully can be a standard procedure, but 
now it's the choice of the user to upgrade fully or just upgrade the desired 
components.






 On Wednesday, August 9, 2017 6:13 PM, Jerome Shidel  
wrote:
 

 Just replacing the COMMAND and SYS files won’t really give you 1.2. It 
wouldjust be 1.1 an upgraded kernel. Take a look at the software comparison 
charton the official FreeDOS software repository. 
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/repositories/1.2/pkg-html/comparison.html
It shows what is included in 1.0, 1,1 and the 1.2 variations. Also, it shows 
theversions that are on the repo. 
Since you probably don’t have a supported NIC in the dedicated machine,you may 
even consider installing 1.2 via the repo CD. The CD image is built 
automatically daily, when a package is updated on the repo.
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/repositories/1.2/
The FreeDOS 1.2 installer will backup your config files. Also, if the new 
system directory (C:\FDOS), already exists, it will also backup and replace it. 
So, make sure you have plenty of free disk space.
However, that assume everything works as designed and nothing goes wrong. I 
highly recommend you create your own backup of anything important.
The first step in that process would be to make a known good bootable 
backup.Format a floppy and preform a sys transfer to that diskette. That way 
you caneasily boot that floppy and restore your kernel. I would also copy your 
currentautoexec.bat and config.sys to a directory on the floppy along with any 
driversyou may require.
Also, please be sure you have good backups for any games you have. I 
wouldn’texpect any serious problems. But, you never know. On top of that, a 
hard drivecan go bad or even completely fail without warning. 
Jerome

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! 
http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


   --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Fw: upgrade my PC from FD 1.1 to FD 1.2

[Samuel V. via Freedos-user]

You can simply back up the kernel file and the console.
Back up COMMAND.COM, KERNEL.SYS, IO.SYS, IBMIO.SYS, etc., in your root 
directory, and then just replace those same files for the files from FreeDOS 
1.2.







 On Wednesday, August 9, 2017 4:20 PM, Pierre LaMontagne 
 wrote:
 

 I have a dedicated PC with FD 1.1 installed on it.  I would like to 
upgrade this PC to FD 1.2 without losing any existing folders or root Dir files 
(start-ups, etc…)       Though, I've spent several hours looking on how to do 
this, I've yet to find anything…       I'm currently primarily a Windows user, 
though I started using PCs with MS-DOS many years ago (first OS was MS-DOS 
version 3.2!). I finally gave-in to using Win (very reluctantly) way back in 
1995.       Can anyone advise an aged ex-DOS-user? 
  BTW, my old 1.1 installation works fine, I mostly only use it for running old 
MS-DOS games.  1.1 has run most all my old stuff surprisingly well.  The few 
that didn't run, I don't know if it is because of a graphics issue (most 
likely) or a 1.1 issue.  I didn't know if the 1.2 upgrade would fix some of 
these issues.  I know it would be easier to just forego any kind of upgrade, 
but... 
  --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! 
http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


   --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

[Freedos-user] Fw: Install FD on a USB pendrive

[Samuel V. via Freedos-user]

To install FreeDOS on an USB flash drive, you can use Rufus, which is one of 
the easiest and most stable ways to do it. Once it's bootable, you can even 
replace the kernel copied by Rufus by your own FreeDOS binaries, which could be 
newer binaries or ones you have compiled yourself.
See the next video to see how to actually install with Rufus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Bd_n3nLsA4

__
__
__
__
 On Tuesday, August 8, 2017 8:18 AM, Bonaventura de'Vidovich 
 wrote:
 

   Hi,
  I'd like to install FD on a USB pendrive.
 I have tried to use the «USB "Full" installer» image but only a little bit o 
free space is avaible. Besides the sistem looks not to run very well starting 
so from USB pendrive.
 How can I do?
 Tanks
 Bonaventura
 --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! 
http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


   --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user