>
> To be honest, since Jeremy disappeared I have little hope that
> there will be a 2039 unstable. I assume that 2039 will instead
> be a 2038 with some 2037 backport parts added, 2040 will have
> some more, and so on, until the rest of unstable can hibernate
> around in peace, waiting for anybody
Hi Jim,
>> The current numbering is that "stable plus patches" will be
>> 2038 while unstable is 2037 (next unstable will be 2039)...
>> Both branches are based on kernel 2035 and for a while they
>> even both used 2035 as version number(s), unfortunately.
>> While it does not have a SF file rel
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Eric Auer wrote:
[...]
> The current numbering is that "stable plus patches" will be
> 2038 while unstable is 2037 (next unstable will be 2039)...
> Both branches are based on kernel 2035 and for a while they
> even both used 2035 as version number(s), unfortunate
Hi Jim,
> I disagree with your "No, but you could say it is stable enough"
> statement. The kernel needs to work reliably. Today, we have two
> branches of the FreeDOS kernel: 2036 stable, and 2037 devel
> (unstable). That shouldn’t be ok, yet somehow we’ve convinced
> ourselves this is acceptabl
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Eric Auer wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> Using MS-DOS 6.2x himem.sys and MS-DOS 6.2x emm386.exe,
>> I have Windows 3.1 running on freedos 1. What I wonder
>> is why 386 enhanced mode errs out with incorrect dos
>> version??? I'm using the unstable kernel that came
>> with f
Is internet access required for FDUPDATE? Or can the files be on a CD?
> - FDUPDATE makes wget downloading the index file from my server correctly,
> - FDUPDATE open the index file and load the package database correcyly,
> - It propose an update, basing on what has been found on user's system,
>
On Sunday 12 April 2009 16:32 (CEST), Adam Norton wrote:
> Is internet access required for FDUPDATE? Or can the files be on a CD?
Hi!
The whole idea is to get updates ONLINE...
So yes, you have to be networked to let FDUPDATE contact the FreeDOS updates
server...
If you already have files on a
Com1/3 and 2/4 share the same irq. If you want to use them
simultaneously, you'll need to change the irq they use. This would
make them non-standard, but there are programs that can add com 3-4 to
your bios port table area, and thus make them viewable by normal dos
apps. I used to have i
On Sunday 12 April 2009 02:35 (CEST), Eric Auer wrote:
> FDUPDATE is written in FreeBASIC and FreeBASIC might have
> issues if your CPU has no or no relatively modern FPU...
> I think Rugxulo knows a workaround for that and will mail
> about the issue with Mateusz.
Hi,
I really don't think it has
Hi,
> Using MS-DOS 6.2x himem.sys and MS-DOS 6.2x emm386.exe,
> I have Windows 3.1 running on freedos 1. What I wonder
> is why 386 enhanced mode errs out with incorrect dos
> version??? I'm using the unstable kernel that came
> with freedos 1. Is anyone working on it to get it
> stable?
No,
On Fri, 2009-04-10 at 10:34 +0200, Mateusz Viste wrote:
> On Friday 10 April 2009 10:24 (CEST), Michael Robinson wrote:
> > I'm still getting the 2 near fnodes error with fdupdate.
>
> Do you tried the beta 0.55 version I sent you few days ago (the one using
> HTGET as a downloader)? Still cra
On Friday 10 April 2009 10:24 (CEST), Michael Robinson wrote:
> I'm still getting the 2 near fnodes error with fdupdate.
Do you tried the beta 0.55 version I sent you few days ago (the one using HTGET
as a downloader)? Still crashing?
> If I could look at the source for fdupdate 0.54, maybe
>
Using MS-DOS 6.2x himem.sys and MS-DOS 6.2x emm386.exe,
I have Windows 3.1 running on freedos 1. What I wonder
is why 386 enhanced mode errs out with incorrect dos
version??? I'm using the unstable kernel that came
with freedos 1. Is anyone working on it to get it
stable?
I swapped out my ser
13 matches
Mail list logo