Re: [Freedos-user] DOS diagnostic tools?
Hi everybody: Other suggestions: https://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk http://www.partition-saving.com/ En miércoles, 15 de mayo de 2024, 03:46:41 CEST, Karen Lewellen via Freedos-user escribió: Eric, While I will work through this list of course, you would need to reach the part of that Wikipedia article that talks of Norton 8, I honestly did not even start using a computer until 1989, and did not own a copy of Norton Utilities until after 200 at the earliest. I used it as an example, because the tools were grouped under the same organizational umbrella, designed to support it each other in solid diagnostic support if that makes sense. Kind of like spinwrite tools, instead of separate programs that may or may not play well together. will see how well these suggestions work with speech though. Thanks, Karen On Wed, 15 May 2024, Eric Auer via Freedos-user wrote: > > Hi Karen, > > the utilities recommended by Rober To sound useful: > > HDAT2 harddisk repair and diagnostics ATA, ATAPI, SATA, USB, SCSI > > ASTRA Advanced Sysinfo Tool and Reporting Assistant > > HWiNFO system information, monitoring and diagnostics > >> Do you recall the items in norton utilities? > > There is a wikipedia article about them: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Utilities > > The first version in 1982 included: > > unerase - Freedos comes with a simple undelete tool > filefix - "repairs damaged files" (?) > disklook - apparently a floppy disk cluster map display? > > secmod - floppy disk sector changer (disk editor, I guess?) > filehide - Freedos attrib should be sufficient for that > bathide - related to filehide > > timemark - "displays date, time, elapsed time" > scratr - sets colors, you can use ANSI and PROMPT for that > reverse - sets colors to black on white > > clear - you can use cls for that > filesort - sorts directories on disk > diskopt - tunes floppy access speed > > beep - just beeps the speaker > print - prints files > > Which free and open tools for directory sorting and > disk editors do we have in the distro at this time? > > I guess diskopt works by creating an interlaced floppy > sector format, which tools do we have for this style? > > According to wikipedia, Norton Utilities 2.0 added filefind > and renames print to lprint because MS DOS 2.0 already came > with a tool called print itself. > > In version 3.0, you get additional tools for file size and > directory listings, system information, text search, wiping > of disks and files etc. > > Which tools do we recommend for directory listings, file size > info and wiping? For size info, I would use the GNU "du" tool, > which is available as DJGPP compiled DOS binary. > > What could we recommend for finding files and text? I guess > the GNU tools "find" and "grep" would be useful choices here? > Similar for "wipe". > > Version 3.1 adds unerase and unremove directory tools. > > New in version 4: Defrag tool (speed disk) and format recover. > The defrag tool is the same which MS DOS 6 bundled later on. > > New in version 4.5: "batch enhander" and a disk editor, the > ncache disk cache (faster than smartdrive / smartdrv) and diag. > > Version 5 improves the disk editor further and bundles 4DOS > in a variant called NDOS. By now, 4DOS is sort of free/open. > > Version 6 adds Win3.1 icons and "diskreet" and improves the > system info. The unerase tool now supports the same optional > delete tracking driver as MS / central point undelete does. > > Version 7 adds support for compressed disks (doublespace, > stacker and superstor formats) and norton disk doctor. Would > be good to know which features the disk doctor had exactly. > > The final DOS version 8 just adds some Win3.1 related tools. > Later versions gradually add Win9x, FAT32, WinNT etc. support > and features specific to Windows, like a registry editor. Even > a line of products for Apple Macintosh existed. Competitors to > Norton Utilities: Central Point PC Tools, various smaller ones. > > The author of spinrite claims norton disk doctor is a rip of it: > https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-666.htm > Spinrite scans disks for recoverable files and even tries some > tricks to reconstruct data from almost unreadable sectors, but > only supports 128 GB style CHS, not LBA. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinRite claims FreeDOS bundled > with SpinRite to trigger some 16-4-8-bit CHS overflow > 128 GB? > > Well-known free/open alternatives are photorec and testdisk. > > The batch enhancer is similar to our v8 power tools, I guess. > It can beep and show messages in color and with text boxe
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
>Microsoft is not willing to go to even the minimal effort of searching >its own archives for the other versions to release them, but if someone >else finds the code, it will permit the release under a permissive > licence. Excuse #1, there's no money being acquired for going over code for releasing as open source. Roger signature.asc Description: PGP signature _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
On Tue, 14 May 2024 at 05:01, Jerome Shidel via Freedos-user wrote: > > Those aren’t even the good versions of MS-DOS. Agreed! > I think if they were serious, they would release 3.3, 5.0 and 6.22. It feels > like they are only placating to the open source community. Agreed on all counts. However, DOS 4 is a little more than a token effort. Together with 386Max or something, it could still be useful today, more so than DOS 3.3, perhaps. But only a very little more. I think, applying Hanlon's Razor here, that this was a chance discovery by someone else, and led to the release. Microsoft is not willing to go to even the minimal effort of searching its own archives for the other versions to release them, but if someone else finds the code, it will permit the release under a permissive licence. It's not much but it's better than nothing. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven IoM: (+44) 7624 277612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884 Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053 _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOS diagnostic tools?
Eric, While I will work through this list of course, you would need to reach the part of that Wikipedia article that talks of Norton 8, I honestly did not even start using a computer until 1989, and did not own a copy of Norton Utilities until after 200 at the earliest. I used it as an example, because the tools were grouped under the same organizational umbrella, designed to support it each other in solid diagnostic support if that makes sense. Kind of like spinwrite tools, instead of separate programs that may or may not play well together. will see how well these suggestions work with speech though. Thanks, Karen On Wed, 15 May 2024, Eric Auer via Freedos-user wrote: Hi Karen, the utilities recommended by Rober To sound useful: HDAT2 harddisk repair and diagnostics ATA, ATAPI, SATA, USB, SCSI ASTRA Advanced Sysinfo Tool and Reporting Assistant HWiNFO system information, monitoring and diagnostics Do you recall the items in norton utilities? There is a wikipedia article about them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Utilities The first version in 1982 included: unerase - Freedos comes with a simple undelete tool filefix - "repairs damaged files" (?) disklook - apparently a floppy disk cluster map display? secmod - floppy disk sector changer (disk editor, I guess?) filehide - Freedos attrib should be sufficient for that bathide - related to filehide timemark - "displays date, time, elapsed time" scratr - sets colors, you can use ANSI and PROMPT for that reverse - sets colors to black on white clear - you can use cls for that filesort - sorts directories on disk diskopt - tunes floppy access speed beep - just beeps the speaker print - prints files Which free and open tools for directory sorting and disk editors do we have in the distro at this time? I guess diskopt works by creating an interlaced floppy sector format, which tools do we have for this style? According to wikipedia, Norton Utilities 2.0 added filefind and renames print to lprint because MS DOS 2.0 already came with a tool called print itself. In version 3.0, you get additional tools for file size and directory listings, system information, text search, wiping of disks and files etc. Which tools do we recommend for directory listings, file size info and wiping? For size info, I would use the GNU "du" tool, which is available as DJGPP compiled DOS binary. What could we recommend for finding files and text? I guess the GNU tools "find" and "grep" would be useful choices here? Similar for "wipe". Version 3.1 adds unerase and unremove directory tools. New in version 4: Defrag tool (speed disk) and format recover. The defrag tool is the same which MS DOS 6 bundled later on. New in version 4.5: "batch enhander" and a disk editor, the ncache disk cache (faster than smartdrive / smartdrv) and diag. Version 5 improves the disk editor further and bundles 4DOS in a variant called NDOS. By now, 4DOS is sort of free/open. Version 6 adds Win3.1 icons and "diskreet" and improves the system info. The unerase tool now supports the same optional delete tracking driver as MS / central point undelete does. Version 7 adds support for compressed disks (doublespace, stacker and superstor formats) and norton disk doctor. Would be good to know which features the disk doctor had exactly. The final DOS version 8 just adds some Win3.1 related tools. Later versions gradually add Win9x, FAT32, WinNT etc. support and features specific to Windows, like a registry editor. Even a line of products for Apple Macintosh existed. Competitors to Norton Utilities: Central Point PC Tools, various smaller ones. The author of spinrite claims norton disk doctor is a rip of it: https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-666.htm Spinrite scans disks for recoverable files and even tries some tricks to reconstruct data from almost unreadable sectors, but only supports 128 GB style CHS, not LBA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinRite claims FreeDOS bundled with SpinRite to trigger some 16-4-8-bit CHS overflow > 128 GB? Well-known free/open alternatives are photorec and testdisk. The batch enhancer is similar to our v8 power tools, I guess. It can beep and show messages in color and with text boxes etc. Regards, Eric ___ 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] DOS diagnostic tools?
Hi Karen, the utilities recommended by Rober To sound useful: HDAT2 harddisk repair and diagnostics ATA, ATAPI, SATA, USB, SCSI ASTRA Advanced Sysinfo Tool and Reporting Assistant HWiNFO system information, monitoring and diagnostics Do you recall the items in norton utilities? There is a wikipedia article about them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Utilities The first version in 1982 included: unerase - Freedos comes with a simple undelete tool filefix - "repairs damaged files" (?) disklook - apparently a floppy disk cluster map display? secmod - floppy disk sector changer (disk editor, I guess?) filehide - Freedos attrib should be sufficient for that bathide - related to filehide timemark - "displays date, time, elapsed time" scratr - sets colors, you can use ANSI and PROMPT for that reverse - sets colors to black on white clear - you can use cls for that filesort - sorts directories on disk diskopt - tunes floppy access speed beep - just beeps the speaker print - prints files Which free and open tools for directory sorting and disk editors do we have in the distro at this time? I guess diskopt works by creating an interlaced floppy sector format, which tools do we have for this style? According to wikipedia, Norton Utilities 2.0 added filefind and renames print to lprint because MS DOS 2.0 already came with a tool called print itself. In version 3.0, you get additional tools for file size and directory listings, system information, text search, wiping of disks and files etc. Which tools do we recommend for directory listings, file size info and wiping? For size info, I would use the GNU "du" tool, which is available as DJGPP compiled DOS binary. What could we recommend for finding files and text? I guess the GNU tools "find" and "grep" would be useful choices here? Similar for "wipe". Version 3.1 adds unerase and unremove directory tools. New in version 4: Defrag tool (speed disk) and format recover. The defrag tool is the same which MS DOS 6 bundled later on. New in version 4.5: "batch enhander" and a disk editor, the ncache disk cache (faster than smartdrive / smartdrv) and diag. Version 5 improves the disk editor further and bundles 4DOS in a variant called NDOS. By now, 4DOS is sort of free/open. Version 6 adds Win3.1 icons and "diskreet" and improves the system info. The unerase tool now supports the same optional delete tracking driver as MS / central point undelete does. Version 7 adds support for compressed disks (doublespace, stacker and superstor formats) and norton disk doctor. Would be good to know which features the disk doctor had exactly. The final DOS version 8 just adds some Win3.1 related tools. Later versions gradually add Win9x, FAT32, WinNT etc. support and features specific to Windows, like a registry editor. Even a line of products for Apple Macintosh existed. Competitors to Norton Utilities: Central Point PC Tools, various smaller ones. The author of spinrite claims norton disk doctor is a rip of it: https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-666.htm Spinrite scans disks for recoverable files and even tries some tricks to reconstruct data from almost unreadable sectors, but only supports 128 GB style CHS, not LBA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpinRite claims FreeDOS bundled with SpinRite to trigger some 16-4-8-bit CHS overflow > 128 GB? Well-known free/open alternatives are photorec and testdisk. The batch enhancer is similar to our v8 power tools, I guess. It can beep and show messages in color and with text boxes etc. Regards, Eric ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] DOS diagnostic tools?
Hi Eric, Do you recall the items in norton utilities? If not, I can post a list of the various tools? I am hoping for a collection of options if that resonates. Norton for example lets you create a repair boot disc, which would be a fine start. that disc then had items to check your hard drive stability, to repair problems, manage formatting those sorts of things. Does that help? Will certainly check out the item you referenced here too. Karen On Tue, 14 May 2024, Eric Auer via Freedos-user wrote: Hi Karen, please specify the type of diagnostics you would be interested in. For example PCISLEEP can give you a list of PCI devices in your PC, but you seem to be interested in disk or filesystem analysis etc.? Maybe tools which display the SMART health status of your disks? I remember having used tools for that and to configure disk sleep. SMARTUDM (1997-2003-?) from sysinfolab was one I tried. No idea whether there are variants supporting post-IDE/ATA/SATA drives. SMARTDFT / DFT 3.00 also displayed or logged SMART disk status. Regards, Eric PS: Interesting to notice that Veit's tools still exist on https://kannegieser.net/veit/programm/index_e.htm My hope is that there is also dos based software supporting the care and diagnostics of that infrastructure? For example, while I have Norton Utilities for DOS, it cannot see my larger drives and so forth. ___ 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] DOS diagnostic tools?
Hi, some ideas: HDAT2/CBL Hard Disk Repair Utility | | | | HDAT2/CBL Hard Disk Repair Utility HDAT2 is program for test or diagnostics of ATA/ATAPI/SATA, SSD, USB and SCSI devices. | | | ASTRA - Advanced Sysinfo Tool and Reporting Assistant | | | | | | | | | | | ASTRA - Advanced Sysinfo Tool and Reporting Assistant ASTRA performs computer configuration analysis and provides detailed information on your computer hardware and i... | | | HWiNFO - Free System Information, Monitoring and Diagnostics | | | | | | | | | | | HWiNFO - Free System Information, Monitoring and Diagnostics Free Hardware Analysis, Monitoring and Reporting. In-depth Hardware Information, Real-Time System Monitoring, Re... | | | En martes, 14 de mayo de 2024, 20:28:07 CEST, Eric Auer via Freedos-user escribió: Hi Karen, please specify the type of diagnostics you would be interested in. For example PCISLEEP can give you a list of PCI devices in your PC, but you seem to be interested in disk or filesystem analysis etc.? Maybe tools which display the SMART health status of your disks? I remember having used tools for that and to configure disk sleep. SMARTUDM (1997-2003-?) from sysinfolab was one I tried. No idea whether there are variants supporting post-IDE/ATA/SATA drives. SMARTDFT / DFT 3.00 also displayed or logged SMART disk status. Regards, Eric PS: Interesting to notice that Veit's tools still exist on https://kannegieser.net/veit/programm/index_e.htm > My hope is that there is also dos based software supporting the care > and diagnostics of that infrastructure? > For example, while I have Norton Utilities for DOS, it cannot see my > larger drives and so forth. _______ 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] DOS diagnostic tools?
Hi Karen, please specify the type of diagnostics you would be interested in. For example PCISLEEP can give you a list of PCI devices in your PC, but you seem to be interested in disk or filesystem analysis etc.? Maybe tools which display the SMART health status of your disks? I remember having used tools for that and to configure disk sleep. SMARTUDM (1997-2003-?) from sysinfolab was one I tried. No idea whether there are variants supporting post-IDE/ATA/SATA drives. SMARTDFT / DFT 3.00 also displayed or logged SMART disk status. Regards, Eric PS: Interesting to notice that Veit's tools still exist on https://kannegieser.net/veit/programm/index_e.htm My hope is that there is also dos based software supporting the care and diagnostics of that infrastructure? For example, while I have Norton Utilities for DOS, it cannot see my larger drives and so forth. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] DOS diagnostic tools?
Hi folks, One stated advantage of freedos shared often is the ability to use more contemporary hardware. My hope is that there is also dos based software supporting the care and diagnostics of that infrastructure? For example, while I have Norton Utilities for DOS, it cannot see my larger drives and so forth. Ideas? Thanks, Karen ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] QEMU, DOOM, and sb16 issue resolved with audiodev specification
Hi, Please consider reporting this to libvirt on GitHub. I'm literally the only user up there who asked for sb16 not to be axed. Speak up, or the devs will speak for you - and usually against your interests. Best regards, Michał W dniu 14.05.2024 o 12:12, Lukáš Kotek via Freedos-user pisze: Hello everyone, I recently hit a problem regarding Sound Blaster 16 card and its emulation using QEMU. In short, if 'sb16' device was specified, DOOM always hung at the moment the sound was about to be initialized. If not, everything worked properly, but without sound. I checked all the info regarding configuration on the wiki, also the youtube video [1] and relevant mailing lists mentioning the same [2] or similar [3] problems. At the end, I found out there is a simple solution for this problem by specification of audiodev backend driver. Working audio configuration: -device sb16,audiodev=snd \ -device adlib,audiodev=snd \ -machine pcspk-audiodev=snd \ -audiodev pipewire,id=snd \ Problematic audio configuration: -device sb16 \ -device adlib \ I am on Fedora 40 and qemu version I am using is qemu-8.2.2-1.fc40. Please, replace pipewire with the backend you actually use (alsa, pa, etc). And sure, proper setting of BLASTER variable is still expected. I'd like to share this here as I noticed there was no clear resolution of these problems in the past. Maybe someone can find it useful :) Also I was thinking about adding a note regarding this (plus few other things I hit in the past) into wiki. What do you think about it, please? Best regards, Lukas 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXSyn_6WB04=16s 2. https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/mailman/message/37302450/ 3. https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/mailman/message/36905837/ ___ 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] QEMU, DOOM, and sb16 issue resolved with audiodev specification
Good to know! I just upgraded to Fedora 40, and I use QEMU to run FreeDOS. I'll have to update my script that runs QEMU. On Tue, May 14, 2024, 5:35 AM Lukáš Kotek via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I recently hit a problem regarding Sound Blaster 16 card and its > emulation using QEMU. In short, if 'sb16' device was specified, DOOM > always hung at the moment the sound was about to be initialized. If not, > everything worked properly, but without sound. I checked all the info > regarding configuration on the wiki, also the youtube video [1] and > relevant mailing lists mentioning the same [2] or similar [3] problems. > > At the end, I found out there is a simple solution for this problem by > specification of audiodev backend driver. > > Working audio configuration: > > -device sb16,audiodev=snd \ > -device adlib,audiodev=snd \ > -machine pcspk-audiodev=snd \ > -audiodev pipewire,id=snd \ > > Problematic audio configuration: > > -device sb16 \ > -device adlib \ > > I am on Fedora 40 and qemu version I am using is qemu-8.2.2-1.fc40. > Please, replace pipewire with the backend you actually use (alsa, pa, > etc). And sure, proper setting of BLASTER variable is still expected. > > I'd like to share this here as I noticed there was no clear resolution > of these problems in the past. Maybe someone can find it useful :) Also > I was thinking about adding a note regarding this (plus few other things > I hit in the past) into wiki. What do you think about it, please? > > Best regards, > Lukas > > 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXSyn_6WB04=16s > 2. https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/mailman/message/37302450/ > 3. https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/mailman/message/36905837/ > > > _______ > 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] QEMU, DOOM, and sb16 issue resolved with audiodev specification
Hello everyone, I recently hit a problem regarding Sound Blaster 16 card and its emulation using QEMU. In short, if 'sb16' device was specified, DOOM always hung at the moment the sound was about to be initialized. If not, everything worked properly, but without sound. I checked all the info regarding configuration on the wiki, also the youtube video [1] and relevant mailing lists mentioning the same [2] or similar [3] problems. At the end, I found out there is a simple solution for this problem by specification of audiodev backend driver. Working audio configuration: -device sb16,audiodev=snd \ -device adlib,audiodev=snd \ -machine pcspk-audiodev=snd \ -audiodev pipewire,id=snd \ Problematic audio configuration: -device sb16 \ -device adlib \ I am on Fedora 40 and qemu version I am using is qemu-8.2.2-1.fc40. Please, replace pipewire with the backend you actually use (alsa, pa, etc). And sure, proper setting of BLASTER variable is still expected. I'd like to share this here as I noticed there was no clear resolution of these problems in the past. Maybe someone can find it useful :) Also I was thinking about adding a note regarding this (plus few other things I hit in the past) into wiki. What do you think about it, please? Best regards, Lukas 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXSyn_6WB04=16s 2. https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/mailman/message/37302450/ 3. https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/mailman/message/36905837/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
That attitude toward the MS-DOS source code seems rather limiting and short-sighted. My recent device driver worked well enough on later versions of DOS (and FreeDOS) but I was having a devil of a time trying to figure out why DOS 2.x would not honor the device driver telling it that the media had been changed. Having the source code available allowed me to find a bug in DOS 2.x, and also cleared up several documentation questions (more like outright problems). Being compatible with all flavors of DOS should matter to anybody writing user code, device drivers, or even FreeDOS developers trying to improve the appeal of FreeDOS. MS has no need to placate the open source community, especially with old versions of DOS. This is somebody's passion project. I look forward to when the source code to DOS 3.3 or DOS 5.0 are released. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
>I have found that the best DosBox for this kind of thing is "DosBox-X". > >It supports applications better than the original DosBox. Relooking over dosbox-x, yup, seems to have everything anybody might need, including all of their wants such as networking. Focused on other things that really matter in life aside from games, similar to FreeDOS. However, only offers RPMs/flatpack; and I find flatpacks a realy hassle. Void Linux unfortunately only offers generic dosbox and dosbox-staging, no dosbox-x. Granted, I could probably easily build dosbox-x from source. Roger signature.asc Description: PGP signature _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
Personally, I have zero interest in any on the versions of DOS that Microsoft has open sourced. Versions 1.25, 2.0 and 4.0. Really? Those aren’t even the good versions of MS-DOS. I think if they were serious, they would release 3.3, 5.0 and 6.22. It feels like they are only placating to the open source community. But, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe they don’t own all the code in those versions. Or, maybe they’ve lost the sources. Even I have programs I wrote from back in that era to which I no longer have the sources. Even when it comes to the “good” versions, I have no interest in how they did things. Sure, I own a copy of MS-DOS 6.22 the last version of MS-DOS. I even own PC-DOS 7.01 (with the upgraded files for 7.10). But, I really only use those for compatibility testing of software. Oh, and maybe a little nostalgia. But as for the actual code they used, I don’t care. The FreeDOS kernel and FreeCOM make for a far more capable Operating System. With the support for more RAM, larger drives and partitions it is a much more useful DOS than either MS or PC. If I were interested in kernel development, I would study the FreeDOS kernel. I would spend my time figuring out how it could be improved. As for FreeCOM, I have my own ideas on what a modern command line shell should be like. But generally, FreeCOM is fine. Any bugs should work themselves out eventually. :-) Jerome ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
..okay. My only surprise was your use of the word *all* where Microsoft is concerned. Speaking personally, their having released say 6.22, would have drawn a bit of a buzz I imagine. On Sun, 12 May 2024, Travis Siegel wrote: Microsoft itself has only released source for dos versions 1.25, 2.0 and 4.0. There are some commercial dos systems that released source for their versions of dos, such as opendos which was caldera dos, they released their version of dos 7.0, which I do have, as well as PTS dos, which released their last version of dos in source form as well, which I have as well. I can't find any license stuff on the PTS dos source, so I have no idea whether their source can be used in anything other than strictly personal environments, but I did have the opendos sources when they were released, and they were under a standard opensource license back when they were released, but then that decision was reversed for some reason, and further releases of that particular dos (of which I think there was only 1) were no longer opensource, but that doesn't really matter, since the opensource version is still available. That means, on a good day, folks can see at least three ways of doing things in dos (legally), though there were versions of MS-DOS version 6.0 that escaped into the wild in source form, which I did have a copy of at one point, though that hd died many many years ago, and I no longer have those sources. I do recall answering a question on a mud one time about the time/date field in dos, since there was some argument about how large the integer was representing the time field. Looking at ms-dos and opendos sources (I didn't have PTS dos sources at the time), there was a difference in the size of the variable used for that field, though I don't remember which dos had the larger variable type, though I did find it interesting that they used different integer types. On 5/12/2024 3:48 AM, Karen Lewellen wrote: Hi Travis, Does that mean the MS Dos code for 7 or so is has been releaced now as well? Sorry you lost your DOS machines in a move. Karen On Sun, 12 May 2024, Travis Siegel via Freedos-user wrote: > Since there was a discussion here recently on multitasking with dos, I'd > like to mention that the github versions of ms-dos has a directory > called v4.0-ozzie > > That directory has some interesting stuff in it, one of them is a couple > of dissk images (I need to move them to a linux machine and see if > they'll mount, I don't have anything on windows that can identify them), > but they also have some documentation (in pdf format) about how their > session manager works, and how to make dos applications multitask. The > session manager program is present as well, so folks could probably mess > around with that to see how well (or not) it works. It might be > something worth experimenting with for those who actually want multiple > dos programs running. > > I'm highly disappointed I lost my dos machines when we moved about 2.5 > years ago, I'd have had a lot of fun playing with this. > > > Also, interestingly enough, just for reference, all of the ms-dos source > code has been released under a MIT license. I find that particularly > interesting. Apparently, Microsoft was serious when they said they're > releasing the code for experimenting, and to see how early operating > systems worked. > > > > > ___ > 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] documentation update
Roger via Freedos-user writes: ... > Anyways, Word Perfect 6.2 is working using Dosbox Staging, albeit > without copy/paste, as I think the copy/paste function likely works for > Dosemu. And, have dosbox auto starting with word perfect, using bash > alias: > > alias wp='dosbox -conf /home/roger/dosbox/wp.conf' > > Anyways, I'm way off-topic... I'm going to say something a little off-topic too on this. Hopefully people won't complain too much. I have found that the best DosBox for this kind of thing is "DosBox-X". It supports applications better than the original DosBox. BR, Rob ___________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
Microsoft itself has only released source for dos versions 1.25, 2.0 and 4.0. There are some commercial dos systems that released source for their versions of dos, such as opendos which was caldera dos, they released their version of dos 7.0, which I do have, as well as PTS dos, which released their last version of dos in source form as well, which I have as well. I can't find any license stuff on the PTS dos source, so I have no idea whether their source can be used in anything other than strictly personal environments, but I did have the opendos sources when they were released, and they were under a standard opensource license back when they were released, but then that decision was reversed for some reason, and further releases of that particular dos (of which I think there was only 1) were no longer opensource, but that doesn't really matter, since the opensource version is still available. That means, on a good day, folks can see at least three ways of doing things in dos (legally), though there were versions of MS-DOS version 6.0 that escaped into the wild in source form, which I did have a copy of at one point, though that hd died many many years ago, and I no longer have those sources. I do recall answering a question on a mud one time about the time/date field in dos, since there was some argument about how large the integer was representing the time field. Looking at ms-dos and opendos sources (I didn't have PTS dos sources at the time), there was a difference in the size of the variable used for that field, though I don't remember which dos had the larger variable type, though I did find it interesting that they used different integer types. On 5/12/2024 3:48 AM, Karen Lewellen wrote: Hi Travis, Does that mean the MS Dos code for 7 or so is has been releaced now as well? Sorry you lost your DOS machines in a move. Karen On Sun, 12 May 2024, Travis Siegel via Freedos-user wrote: Since there was a discussion here recently on multitasking with dos, I'd like to mention that the github versions of ms-dos has a directory called v4.0-ozzie That directory has some interesting stuff in it, one of them is a couple of dissk images (I need to move them to a linux machine and see if they'll mount, I don't have anything on windows that can identify them), but they also have some documentation (in pdf format) about how their session manager works, and how to make dos applications multitask. The session manager program is present as well, so folks could probably mess around with that to see how well (or not) it works. It might be something worth experimenting with for those who actually want multiple dos programs running. I'm highly disappointed I lost my dos machines when we moved about 2.5 years ago, I'd have had a lot of fun playing with this. Also, interestingly enough, just for reference, all of the ms-dos source code has been released under a MIT license. I find that particularly interesting. Apparently, Microsoft was serious when they said they're releasing the code for experimenting, and to see how early operating systems worked. ___ 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] odd news
Hi, On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 5:30 PM Eric Auer via Freedos-user wrote: > > the changes to nasm do not seem to affect the dos version either? My announcement on BTTR (since at least ecm heavily uses NASM) said this: Most of the changes came from 2.16.02 (April 4), e.g. "Fix external references to segments in the obj (OMF) and possibly other output formats." _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
I thankfully never had dos 4.00, though I did have pcdos 4.01, which was a big improvement. over the .00 release. Not sure how/why the 4.00 versions were released, but even then, for some reason, the pc versions of dos were considered to be worlds better than the ms versions. Don't know why, because I never used the same versions of dos crossing pc/ms boundaries, I always had one or the other. On 5/12/2024 3:22 AM, Brandon Taylor wrote: It could be interesting (even though MS-DOS 4.0 was complete and utter GARBAGE according to anybody who had the misfortune to use it) to see what it can unlock as far as possibilities for FreeDOS 1.4. On a side note, when will "bare-metal" networking (e.g. for 86Box) be available once again? Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> *From:* Travis Siegel via Freedos-user *Sent:* Saturday, May 11, 2024 9:30:59 PM *To:* Discussion and general questions about FreeDOS. *Cc:* Travis Siegel *Subject:* [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code Since there was a discussion here recently on multitasking with dos, I'd like to mention that the github versions of ms-dos has a directory called v4.0-ozzie That directory has some interesting stuff in it, one of them is a couple of dissk images (I need to move them to a linux machine and see if they'll mount, I don't have anything on windows that can identify them), but they also have some documentation (in pdf format) about how their session manager works, and how to make dos applications multitask. The session manager program is present as well, so folks could probably mess around with that to see how well (or not) it works. It might be something worth experimenting with for those who actually want multiple dos programs running. I'm highly disappointed I lost my dos machines when we moved about 2.5 years ago, I'd have had a lot of fun playing with this. Also, interestingly enough, just for reference, all of the ms-dos source code has been released under a MIT license. I find that particularly interesting. Apparently, Microsoft was serious when they said they're releasing the code for experimenting, and to see how early operating systems worked. _______ 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] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
Thanks Jim, Was wondering given Travis said all, in his post smiles. Karen On Sat, 11 May 2024, Jim Hall via Freedos-user wrote: On Sat, May 11, 2024, 10:49???PM Karen Lewellen via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: Hi Travis, Does that mean the MS Dos code for 7 or so is has been releaced now as well? No, Microsoft has only released MS-DOS versions 1.25, 2.0 and 4.00 so far. Nothing beyond that. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
On Sat, May 11, 2024, 10:49 PM Karen Lewellen via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hi Travis, > Does that mean the MS Dos code for 7 or so is has been releaced now as > well? > No, Microsoft has only released MS-DOS versions 1.25, 2.0 and 4.00 so far. Nothing beyond that. _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
Hi Travis, Does that mean the MS Dos code for 7 or so is has been releaced now as well? Sorry you lost your DOS machines in a move. Karen On Sun, 12 May 2024, Travis Siegel via Freedos-user wrote: Since there was a discussion here recently on multitasking with dos, I'd like to mention that the github versions of ms-dos has a directory called v4.0-ozzie That directory has some interesting stuff in it, one of them is a couple of dissk images (I need to move them to a linux machine and see if they'll mount, I don't have anything on windows that can identify them), but they also have some documentation (in pdf format) about how their session manager works, and how to make dos applications multitask. The session manager program is present as well, so folks could probably mess around with that to see how well (or not) it works. It might be something worth experimenting with for those who actually want multiple dos programs running. I'm highly disappointed I lost my dos machines when we moved about 2.5 years ago, I'd have had a lot of fun playing with this. Also, interestingly enough, just for reference, all of the ms-dos source code has been released under a MIT license. I find that particularly interesting. Apparently, Microsoft was serious when they said they're releasing the code for experimenting, and to see how early operating systems worked. ___ 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] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
It could be interesting (even though MS-DOS 4.0 was complete and utter GARBAGE according to anybody who had the misfortune to use it) to see what it can unlock as far as possibilities for FreeDOS 1.4. On a side note, when will "bare-metal" networking (e.g. for 86Box) be available once again? Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> From: Travis Siegel via Freedos-user Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2024 9:30:59 PM To: Discussion and general questions about FreeDOS. Cc: Travis Siegel Subject: [Freedos-user] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code Since there was a discussion here recently on multitasking with dos, I'd like to mention that the github versions of ms-dos has a directory called v4.0-ozzie That directory has some interesting stuff in it, one of them is a couple of dissk images (I need to move them to a linux machine and see if they'll mount, I don't have anything on windows that can identify them), but they also have some documentation (in pdf format) about how their session manager works, and how to make dos applications multitask. The session manager program is present as well, so folks could probably mess around with that to see how well (or not) it works. It might be something worth experimenting with for those who actually want multiple dos programs running. I'm highly disappointed I lost my dos machines when we moved about 2.5 years ago, I'd have had a lot of fun playing with this. Also, interestingly enough, just for reference, all of the ms-dos source code has been released under a MIT license. I find that particularly interesting. Apparently, Microsoft was serious when they said they're releasing the code for experimenting, and to see how early operating systems worked. _______ 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] the msdos 4.0 sources has some multitasking code
Since there was a discussion here recently on multitasking with dos, I'd like to mention that the github versions of ms-dos has a directory called v4.0-ozzie That directory has some interesting stuff in it, one of them is a couple of dissk images (I need to move them to a linux machine and see if they'll mount, I don't have anything on windows that can identify them), but they also have some documentation (in pdf format) about how their session manager works, and how to make dos applications multitask. The session manager program is present as well, so folks could probably mess around with that to see how well (or not) it works. It might be something worth experimenting with for those who actually want multiple dos programs running. I'm highly disappointed I lost my dos machines when we moved about 2.5 years ago, I'd have had a lot of fun playing with this. Also, interestingly enough, just for reference, all of the ms-dos source code has been released under a MIT license. I find that particularly interesting. Apparently, Microsoft was serious when they said they're releasing the code for experimenting, and to see how early operating systems worked. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:43:06PM +0100, Liam Proven via Freedos-user wrote: >On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 22:20, Roger via Freedos-user > wrote: > >> >They also have pre-compiled packages for Fedora and OpenSUSE. >> >No manual compilation is needed for either of the 3 distros. >> >> Already know about these pre-package options for SystemD Linux >> distributions. > >Whoa there. > >Fedora and the Red Hat family, yes: no choice but systemd. Ditto >openSUSE. But dosemu2 also offers `.deb` packages and there are >several non-systemd Debian-family distros, including Devuan, antiX and >MX Linux. I use none of those distribution, although I have tried Devuan and antix, especially just prior to switching from Gentoo to Void Linux several years ago for avoiding wasting time compiling packages. >I also note: > >https://www.reddit.com/r/voidlinux/comments/hqm7z2/xdeb_a_simple_utility_to_convert_debian_packages/ Not a recommended official Void Linux practice, of using a utility (eg. xdeb) for converting one distribution's pre-compiled packages to another distribution's package, due to breaking compile-time dependencies and run-time dependencies. The other problem, most other pre-compiled packages or tarballs improperly will install into /usr, rather than using /usr/local for third party packages not native to the Linux distribution being used. This later is sort of being organized, and most times not easily worked around due to files expecting /usr rather than /usr/local. (eg. libraries) Nature of the beast here. :-/ Anyways, Word Perfect 6.2 is working using Dosbox Staging, albeit without copy/paste, as I think the copy/paste function likely works for Dosemu. And, have dosbox auto starting with word perfect, using bash alias: alias wp='dosbox -conf /home/roger/dosbox/wp.conf' Anyways, I'm way off-topic... signature.asc Description: PGP signature _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 22:20, Roger via Freedos-user wrote: > >They also have pre-compiled packages for Fedora and OpenSUSE. > >No manual compilation is needed for either of the 3 distros. > > Already know about these pre-package options for SystemD Linux > distributions. Whoa there. Fedora and the Red Hat family, yes: no choice but systemd. Ditto openSUSE. But dosemu2 also offers `.deb` packages and there are several non-systemd Debian-family distros, including Devuan, antiX and MX Linux. I also note: https://www.reddit.com/r/voidlinux/comments/hqm7z2/xdeb_a_simple_utility_to_convert_debian_packages/ -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven IoM: (+44) 7624 277612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884 Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053 _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
On Thu, May 9, 2024, 7:03 PM Roger via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > https://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/Main_Page > > [..] The wiki migration (from sourceforge to the new hosting) was incomplete because the SF server update broke the wiki. I didn't get to copy over the "how to install on virtualbox" pages before then - but once I'm done with the client work I'm working on now, I can copy things over from the database copy and then the wiki will be more complete. As complete as it was from when we were hosted at SF. So yes, these pages are currently missing, but they'll be there soon. _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] Future FreeDOS [was documentation update]
Hi > On May 9, 2024, at 6:31 PM, Eric Auer via Freedos-user > wrote: > > > Hi! > > Turns out I only had some 2020 Bochs and no boot "disk" > for it, so I could not easily test any hotkeys :-o But: > >>> What if the DOS distro installer can be improved, so it no >>> longer matters which emulator or virtualizer people use? ;-) > >> As I’ve mentioned many times before, it already does that. >> And has done that since FreeDOS 1.2. > > I was not referring to "autodetect in which virtual > environment you are and do special things for that" > but to "be flexible enough with real or virtual PC > hardware to just work out of the box with all popular > virtual computers", in combination with "to make it > easy to install DOS on virtual computers, we could > have a disk image with pre-installed DOS, suitable > for all types of virtual PC, one size fits all". > > Of course virtual computers today tend to be tuned > towards Linux or Windows running inside them, but > my hope was that a few hints for options might be > enough, something like "configure your virtual PC > to offer AC97 or HDA sound, SATA without AHCI and > BIOS instead of UEFI boot mode, then this FreeDOS > disk image should be sufficiently happy", leaving > "only" the issue that emulators often isolate DOS > too well. Because you need specific drivers to get > files out of or into the virtual computer, which > is a problem very elegantly avoided by dosemu2 or > dosbox or similar DOS specific environments. > > There are drivers for DOS as client OS for some > virtual PC, but no universal ones. And there are > drivers for a few of the network cards a typical > virtual PC can simulate, but maybe not for those > simulated by default and maybe not at least one > for each popular virtual PC brand? In addition, > it is not very convenient to have to use a FTP > or NFS or SAMBA client or web browser for DOS > to transfer files, which in addition means that > you would have to run the corresponding servers > on the host operating system, on your real PC. I think I see the distinction you are trying to make. Unfortunately, I think that probably won’t happen in the official release. But, there is no reason a third party could not make a bunch of pre-installed tuned images for various virtual environments. > >> However when it comes to virtual environments, it >> only has separate config files for DOSBox at this time. > > In a perfect world, no special config would be needed, > because a generic config would be compatible enough. Yes. But, that leads to much more complex auto/config files. With the recent updates to those files, we seem to be moving in the opposite direction. By which I mean, providing much simpler and easier to modify configuration files. Along with different sets of those files based on hardware requirements and capabilities. > > But I agree that exactly because dosbox and similar > are MEANT to be used with DOS, it can be good to > have a special config to activate the special DOS > interaction helpers dosbox and others support :-) > >> ... V8Power Tools program VINFO to detect if and what >> virtual environment it is installing the OS. At present, >> that is Virtual Box, VMware, QEMU, DOSBox and some others > > Good to know :-) > >> As you may recall, the installer now uses this information >> to also determine how to behave when a disk is not partitioned. > >> On real hardware when a drive has no partitions, the installer >> will prompt to overwrite the MBR. Inside known virtual environments, >> it just overwrites it and does not bother the user. > > I remember that I would prefer if the detection checks > whether there is absolutely nothing that could get lost, > not whether the target is virtual. If the disk is REALLY > totally empty, then there is less need to ask. If it is > NOT, then even in a virtual PC I would prefer to be asked. > > It also is conceivable that the detection just THINKS a > disk is empty, due to a read error. So I would prefer > the most cautious approach, even if it means that the > user has to press a few more buttons during install :-) My previous email was a major abbreviation of the differences between real and virtual hardware as related to the MBR. It only installs it automatically when running under a known virtual machine AND the drive has a single DOS partition AND you proceed to installing the OS. And even that can be overridden using the advanced mode of the installer. On real hardware or unknown virtual environments, it just asks. > >> Big and little USB images, live and legacy CD, plus the floppy edi
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
https://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/Main_Page How do I install FreeDOS? FreeDOS for everyone: "We recommend using a PC emulator or virtual machine to install FreeDOS. If you don't want to install, you can boot the LiveCD to try it out." And What do I need to run FreeDOS? "If you are new to DOS, we recommend you use a PC emulator or Virtual machine such as VirtualBox to install and boot FreeDOS. You can find PC emulators for all computer platforms (Windows, Linux, Mac.)" Again, on the FreeDOS wiki page concerning installing FreeDOS, vague instructions, "We recommend using a PC emulator or virtual machine to install FreeDOS.", with the subsequent emulator and virtual machine links leading to blank pages. Based on Jim Hall's FreeDOS book, I suggest adding his apparently preferred virtual machine qemu here, so users are not left hanging researching multiple DOS emulators/virtual machines. I think the respective links for emulators and virtual machines on the FreeDOS Wiki page were likely suppose to contain the data I recently wrote about within the past Emails, concerning DOSEMU/DOSEMU2, Qemu, and Bochs. As well as including Qemu incantations for running on Linux and other O/S. However, obviously documenting all possible incantations for every O/S becomes overwhelming! The FreeDOS wiki oddly negates mentioning Qemu, referencing only VirtualBox instead. Shrugs... no big deal, just probably an area needing clarification for others! Roger signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
itions, one of them as safely to resize D: drive :-) With enough ram, it relocates itself onto a RAM drive... ...which is a bottleneck on old computers, while less old computers can already boot from USB. However, BIOS support for USB "disks" can be very SLOW, so maybe a RAMDISK has advantages even on newer REAL computers? On VIRTUAL ones, however, I would really prefer a virtual PERSISTENT disk. disadvantages are a slightly longer boot time and changes are not persistent. Exactly. But the user could have a virtual HD attached to remedy that. The idea was that SHIPPING FreeDOS pre-installed on virtual harddisk would both remedy that AND completely avoid the very need to perform an installation at all :-) Regards, Eric ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 09:52:39PM +0200, Eric Auer via Freedos-user wrote: > >Hi! >> Initially I tried Bochs, but found Bochs either cannot go full screen >> using SDL2, or I just haven't found the magical incantation... > >A quick google says "try alt-enter" (to go full screen). In 2011, this >had the side-effect of risking to switch to a resolution DOS dislikes, >I have not googled further to check whether Bochs in 2024 has issues? For kicks, just tried Bochs and FreeDOS again with host being Linux, and alt-enter/return key combinations do not appear to do anything. Bochs on Linux using SDL2 nowadays and from forum searches, still doesn't allow full screen for easier font/character reading. Think with Windows hosts, they do have an option for using full screen, along with an elegant graphical Boch's package installer with other already configured options. So again, from my research, Bochs emulation is more likely for those learning the inards of an operating system or investigating transfer of data within an application or software. >> More research showed DOSEMU out of date and not available on Void Linux > >I agree regarding the first part, but have never heard of Void Linux. > >> distribution here, and/or requiring other self compiled libraries, as >> well as DOSEMU2 requiring additional self compiled libraries, with only >> DOSBOX (intended for games) available on Void Linux. > >For Ubuntu, you can simply add the PPA to your software manager, > >https://github.com/dosemu2/dosemu2 explains the details. > >They also have pre-compiled packages for Fedora and OpenSUSE. >No manual compilation is needed for either of the 3 distros. Already know about these pre-package options for SystemD Linux distributions. >> After more research, found Jim Hall's book tends to sway towards >> suggesting Qemu, a virtualizer rather than an Emulator. I have and >> currently use Virtualbox here, but wanted to remain to the de facto used >> emulator for DOS environments. Regardless, Qemu readily resizes to full >> screen, so that I can finally see and read the font/characters. > >I doubt that there is a "de facto used emulator for DOS". > >Personally, I prefer dosemu2. Windows users often prefer dosbox. From what I'm seeing DOSEMU2 emulator, if available for your Linux distribution, then Qemu virtualizor is most often used for Linux hosts. Else, Bochs for scientific research of the O/S or applications within the emulated environment. >Various users also like to use software which emulates or >virtualizes a complete PC on which you then install DOS, >but I have no idea why that would be better than dosbox or >dosemu2 which spezicalize on supporting DOS and offer nice >magic like "any Linux DIRECTORY can become your C: DISK". This was another tricky bit, similar to long ago initially learning host/client operating systems, the difference of emulators and virtualizations. Some .edu site(s) recommend DOSEMU/DOSEMU2 for using DOS Word Perfect, due to copy/paste, etc... >> 1) Jim Hall's FreeDOS qemu incantation likely needs some minimal >> updating, for those that desire to get-up and running quickly... >> >> $ qemu-system-x86_64 -name FreeDOS -machine >> pc-i440fx-4.2,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off >etc. > >That is a very long command line indeed! An incantation :-o Shrugs, being a command line junky, I like it. A good organized hierarchy/pyramid building schematic of software engineering and usage! Granted, Qemu has some really long command line incantations, with some elusive and not well explained options/arguments, or well organized and easily learned. Sound devices/configuration being one series of options/arguments. But if, like Jim Hall's book, already documents for easy copy/pasting, and successfully works, users will not have to muck around editing large text configuration files with many subsequent saving/loading operations. Almost like click and play, but on the command line. Once working, then can likely save arguments/options to either a configuration or sh/bash/batch script. >> 2) Book or documentation should probably lead or advise users, the >> best (as of date) emulator or virtualizer per their intended use. > >What if the DOS distro installer can be improved, so it no >longer matters which emulator or virtualizer people use? ;-) Likely already the target of DOSEMU/DOSEMU2. Only problem is, I do not think either readily compile on Void Linux, due to missing (fdd?) dependency. Then also noticed I need an additional GIT source compiled library. Long story short, likely need either DOSEMU/DOSEMU2 package for Void Linux. But Void Linux users likely opted only for Bochs or Qemu, as DOSEMU2 might be only slightly differing or userbase only
Re: [Freedos-user] documentation update
Hi, > On May 9, 2024, at 3:53 PM, Eric Auer via Freedos-user > wrote: > > > Hi! >> Initially I tried Bochs, but found Bochs either cannot go full screen >> using SDL2, or I just haven't found the magical incantation... > > A quick google says "try alt-enter" (to go full screen). In 2011, this > had the side-effect of risking to switch to a resolution DOS dislikes, > I have not googled further to check whether Bochs in 2024 has issues? > >> More research showed DOSEMU out of date and not available on Void Linux > > I agree regarding the first part, but have never heard of Void Linux. > >> distribution here, and/or requiring other self compiled libraries, as >> well as DOSEMU2 requiring additional self compiled libraries, with only >> DOSBOX (intended for games) available on Void Linux. > > For Ubuntu, you can simply add the PPA to your software manager, > > https://github.com/dosemu2/dosemu2 explains the details. > > They also have pre-compiled packages for Fedora and OpenSUSE. > No manual compilation is needed for either of the 3 distros. > >> After more research, found Jim Hall's book tends to sway towards >> suggesting Qemu, a virtualizer rather than an Emulator. I have and >> currently use Virtualbox here, but wanted to remain to the de facto used >> emulator for DOS environments. Regardless, Qemu readily resizes to full >> screen, so that I can finally see and read the font/characters. > > I doubt that there is a "de facto used emulator for DOS". > > Personally, I prefer dosemu2. Windows users often prefer dosbox. > > Various users also like to use software which emulates or > virtualizes a complete PC on which you then install DOS, > but I have no idea why that would be better than dosbox or > dosemu2 which spezicalize on supporting DOS and offer nice > magic like "any Linux DIRECTORY can become your C: DISK". > >> 1) Jim Hall's FreeDOS qemu incantation likely needs some minimal >> updating, for those that desire to get-up and running quickly... >> $ qemu-system-x86_64 -name FreeDOS -machine >> pc-i440fx-4.2,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off > etc. > > That is a very long command line indeed! An incantation :-o > >> 2) Book or documentation should probably lead or advise users, the >> best (as of date) emulator or virtualizer per their intended use. > > What if the DOS distro installer can be improved, so it no > longer matters which emulator or virtualizer people use? ;-) As I’ve mentioned many times before, it already does that. And has done that since FreeDOS 1.2. However when it comes to virtual environments, it only has separate config files for DOSBox at this time. It relies on V8Power Tools program VINFO to detect if and what virtual environment it is installing the OS. At present, that is Virtual Box, VMware, QEMU, DOSBox and some others as simply Generic. As you may recall, the installer now uses this information to also determine how to behave when a disk is not partitioned. On real hardware when a drive has no partitions, the installer will prompt to overwrite the MBR. Inside known virtual environments, it just overwrites it and does not bother the user. > >> As they say, the more we keep something simple, the easier >> and more readily we get things done. > > We could provide a disk image with pre-installed DOS. I don’t think we need more types of release media. We already have 5. Big and little USB images, live and legacy CD, plus the floppy edition. > > This would be convenient for users of virtual computers, > because they do not need to worry about installing to > actual disks when their disks are imaginary anyway :-) Sounds similar to what the LiveCD provides. Without the worry of having too small or too large of a disk image for the user’s needs. With enough ram, it relocates itself onto a RAM drive, you can even install and remove packages. Swap the CD out and install other software. The only disadvantages are a slightly longer boot time and changes are not persistent. But the user could have a virtual HD attached to remedy that. > > Regards, Eric > > Jerome > > > _______ > 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] documentation update
Hi! Initially I tried Bochs, but found Bochs either cannot go full screen using SDL2, or I just haven't found the magical incantation... A quick google says "try alt-enter" (to go full screen). In 2011, this had the side-effect of risking to switch to a resolution DOS dislikes, I have not googled further to check whether Bochs in 2024 has issues? More research showed DOSEMU out of date and not available on Void Linux I agree regarding the first part, but have never heard of Void Linux. distribution here, and/or requiring other self compiled libraries, as well as DOSEMU2 requiring additional self compiled libraries, with only DOSBOX (intended for games) available on Void Linux. For Ubuntu, you can simply add the PPA to your software manager, https://github.com/dosemu2/dosemu2 explains the details. They also have pre-compiled packages for Fedora and OpenSUSE. No manual compilation is needed for either of the 3 distros. After more research, found Jim Hall's book tends to sway towards suggesting Qemu, a virtualizer rather than an Emulator. I have and currently use Virtualbox here, but wanted to remain to the de facto used emulator for DOS environments. Regardless, Qemu readily resizes to full screen, so that I can finally see and read the font/characters. I doubt that there is a "de facto used emulator for DOS". Personally, I prefer dosemu2. Windows users often prefer dosbox. Various users also like to use software which emulates or virtualizes a complete PC on which you then install DOS, but I have no idea why that would be better than dosbox or dosemu2 which spezicalize on supporting DOS and offer nice magic like "any Linux DIRECTORY can become your C: DISK". 1) Jim Hall's FreeDOS qemu incantation likely needs some minimal updating, for those that desire to get-up and running quickly... $ qemu-system-x86_64 -name FreeDOS -machine pc-i440fx-4.2,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off etc. That is a very long command line indeed! An incantation :-o 2) Book or documentation should probably lead or advise users, the best (as of date) emulator or virtualizer per their intended use. What if the DOS distro installer can be improved, so it no longer matters which emulator or virtualizer people use? ;-) As they say, the more we keep something simple, the easier and more readily we get things done. We could provide a disk image with pre-installed DOS. This would be convenient for users of virtual computers, because they do not need to worry about installing to actual disks when their disks are imaginary anyway :-) Regards, Eric ___________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] documentation update
MY EXPERIENCE INSTALLING FREEDOS Took a week or so trying to install a DOS enviroment along with an install of Word Perfect, quickly reading/scanning through all available Internet documentation as of 2024/05 date. Some key bits of information were from Jim Hall's FreeDOS book, detailing an install of FreeDOS using Qemu. With the book very quickly and vaguely stating to use an emulator, of the many available emulators available. Nowdays, there's several types emulators/virtualizers, with varying abilities and intend usage scenarios. Initially I tried Bochs, but found Bochs either cannot go full screen using SDL2, or I just haven't found the magical incantation. (I could not read the characters/font!) Later finding Bochs is moreso respected as a de facto or standard scientific or reverse/understanding coding tool. More research showed DOSEMU out of date and not available on Void Linux distribution here, and/or requiring other self compiled libraries, as well as DOSEMU2 requiring additional self compiled libraries, with only DOSBOX (intended for games) available on Void Linux. After more research, found Jim Hall's book tends to sway towards suggesting Qemu, a virtualizer rather than an Emulator. I have and currently use Virtualbox here, but wanted to remain to the de facto used emulator for DOS environments. Regardless, Qemu readily resizes to full screen, so that I can finally see and read the font/characters. LIKELY CHANGES/CLARIFICATIONS How to install FreeDOS without the installer https://www.freedos.org/books/get-started/14-manual-install/ 1) Jim Hall's FreeDOS qemu incantation likely needs some minimal updating, for those that desire to get-up and running quickly within a DOS environment: $ qemu-system-x86_64 -name FreeDOS -machine pc-i440fx-4.2,accel=kvm,usb=off,dump-guest-core=off -enable-kvm -cpu host -m 8 -overcommit mem-lock=off -no-user-config -nodefaults -rtc base=utc,driftfix=slew -machine hpet=off -boot menu=on,strict=on -sandbox on,obsolete=deny,elevateprivileges=deny,spawn=deny,resourcecontrol=deny -msg timestamp=on -drive format=raw,file=freedos-mine.img -drive format=raw,file=FD13FULL/FD13FULL.img -vga cirrus -usbdevice mouse -device sb16 -device adlib -audio driver=alsa,id=snd0,out.dev=default -audiodev alsa,id=snd0 -machine pcspk-audiodev=snd0 Hpet option needed updating, using -drive was necessary for averting warning during start concerning raw format, sound options/arguments have been renamed/reorganized with sound not known if working using ALSA, but annoying PC speaker beep works! Another note, likely using the USB full image, rather than multiple floppies is far easier and more simplified. I'm not sure if the other non-explained options/arguments are still needed, or if additional options/arguments are required with the updated Qemu environment, but so far FreeDOS boots and seems to work. 2) Book or documentation should probably lead or advise users, the best (as of date) emulator or virtualizer per their intended use. (eg. under-the-hood operations, likely use Bochs, while most others should likely use Qemu?) As they say, the more we keep something simple, the easier and more readily we get things done. Roger signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] odd news
> Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 00:29:44 +0200 > From: Eric Auer > > and a dos port of gnupg where important features cannot be used > because dos has no /dev/random (see bttr thread) be newsworthy? The DOS port of gnupg should be fully functional now, both on FreeDOS and MS-DOS. When generating keys, it depends on the same /dev/random$ that is included in the FreeDOS lynx package (the NOISE driver). _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] dos navigator
On Wed, 8 May 2024, Daniel Essin via Freedos-user wrote: Try it in a VM Yeah, I would, but that's not really an option for me. On 5/8/24 6:21 PM, Travis Siegel via Freedos-user wrote: I found my copy of PTS DOS Source, and was digging through them to see some of the differences between that and opendos, for which I also have the sources, and I ran across the dos navigator menuing system (at least I'm pretty sure it's a menu system, don't currently have a dos machine setup anywhere, so can't run it). But, interestingly enough, it's opensource as well, and I was curious if free dos would be willing to include it, there's a lot of traffic on the list at times looking for a decent menuing system, dos navigator could be the answer. PTS DOS uses it, so why not? It can be found at: https://www.ritlabs.com/en/products/dn/ just in case anyone is interested in taking a look. ___ 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
Re: [Freedos-user] dos navigator
Try it in a VM On 5/8/24 6:21 PM, Travis Siegel via Freedos-user wrote: I found my copy of PTS DOS Source, and was digging through them to see some of the differences between that and opendos, for which I also have the sources, and I ran across the dos navigator menuing system (at least I'm pretty sure it's a menu system, don't currently have a dos machine setup anywhere, so can't run it). But, interestingly enough, it's opensource as well, and I was curious if free dos would be willing to include it, there's a lot of traffic on the list at times looking for a decent menuing system, dos navigator could be the answer. PTS DOS uses it, so why not? It can be found at: https://www.ritlabs.com/en/products/dn/ just in case anyone is interested in taking a look. ___ 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] dos navigator
I found my copy of PTS DOS Source, and was digging through them to see some of the differences between that and opendos, for which I also have the sources, and I ran across the dos navigator menuing system (at least I'm pretty sure it's a menu system, don't currently have a dos machine setup anywhere, so can't run it). But, interestingly enough, it's opensource as well, and I was curious if free dos would be willing to include it, there's a lot of traffic on the list at times looking for a decent menuing system, dos navigator could be the answer. PTS DOS uses it, so why not? It can be found at: https://www.ritlabs.com/en/products/dn/ just in case anyone is interested in taking a look. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] odd news
[..] > 1. I keep an eye on the "DOS Ain't Dead" forums via their RSS feed, > and I thought the httpDOS announcement on "DOS Ain't Dead" was > interesting. And we sometimes (not all the time, but sometimes) get > people who ask what cool network stuff they can do with FreeDOS. And > this was something that SuperIlu had made, and SuperIlu has done some > other DOS stuff (like dojs, the javascript programming canvas for DOS) > so it wasn't just some random person posting about it. So I posted it > as a news item on the website in case anyone else was interested. But > I also posted it "first" so it wouldn't be the first item in the news > feed. > And to add: the news item points out that httpDOS isn't fully functional. It says this: > SuperIlu has created a simple TLS-capable HTTP server for DOS. As > SuperIlu explains, "It is not in real working condition" but > it's an interesting demonstration of what you can do with DOS > in 2024. httpDOS is distributed under the BSD license, with > components under other open source licenses. You can find it > on the httpDOS GitHub project. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] odd news
On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 5:30 PM Eric Auer via Freedos-user wrote: > > > hi! as jim prefers all dos related things to be discussed on-list: > > why would a https server which is "not in real working condition" > and a dos port of gnupg where important features cannot be used > because dos has no /dev/random (see bttr thread) be newsworthy? > the changes to nasm do not seem to affect the dos version either? > i hope it is not necessary to start 3 separate list threads now ;-) > > https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/ > FYI to others: news items from the "FreeDOS @ SourceForge" feed automatically show up on https://www.freedos.org/ so these items are also on the FreeDOS website. I'll answer them, since I posted these news items: 1. I keep an eye on the "DOS Ain't Dead" forums via their RSS feed, and I thought the httpDOS announcement on "DOS Ain't Dead" was interesting. And we sometimes (not all the time, but sometimes) get people who ask what cool network stuff they can do with FreeDOS. And this was something that SuperIlu had made, and SuperIlu has done some other DOS stuff (like dojs, the javascript programming canvas for DOS) so it wasn't just some random person posting about it. So I posted it as a news item on the website in case anyone else was interested. But I also posted it "first" so it wouldn't be the first item in the news feed. 2. Again, I thought it was interesting that someone had ported GNU's GPG to DOS, and the announcement was from someone who had ported Unix/Linux/GNU programs like this before. So I posted an item about it on the website. I didn't see the rest of the thread <https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/board_entry.php?id=21759> that there's a reproducible bug in generating the keypair. [The RSS feed doesn't always make it easy to see everything in a thread, at least with the RSS reader I use.] But not every version of every open source program will be perfect - "release early, release often." 3. I think programmers would want to know what's going on with the tools they like to use, and this was an update to a popular assembler that folks use on DOS. The changes didn't affect functionality, but that's noted in the news item: > Netwide Assembler - abbreviated [NASM] - is an assembler > for the x86 CPU architecture portable to nearly every modern > platform, and with code generation for many platforms including > DOS. NASM 2.16.03 was recently released, but is a source build > machinery and documentation update only. [Changes] include: > Fix building from git in a separate directory from the source, > and remove some irrelevant files from the source. There are > no functionality changes. Download the latest version at [NASM > 2.16.03] - including the [DOS version]. For anyone who's curious, the FreeDOS website displays 6 news items, then there's a "More news" link to see the rest of the feed. [This is a placeholder link .. I'd like to make a change over the summer where a "View more" button expands to show more news items without leaving the FreeDOS website.] The news items are: NASM 2.16.03 2024-05-08 9:16am GnuPG 1.4.23 for DOS 2024-05-08 9:09am httpDOS web server for DOS 2024-05-08 9:06am Microsoft and IBM release MS-DOS 4.00 as open source software 2024-04-27 2:52pm USBDDOS 2024-04-20 4:34pm MicroWeb ver 2.0 2024-04-20 4:27pm And the next few items under "More news" are: VSBHDA version 1.4 4/20 Public domain libm math library 0.7 4/13 FreeDOS videos on YouTube 4/10 Angband 4.2.5 for DOS 3/20 I didn't think people would mind seeing "news about open source DOS stuff" on the FreeDOS website. :-) ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] odd news
hi! as jim prefers all dos related things to be discussed on-list: why would a https server which is "not in real working condition" and a dos port of gnupg where important features cannot be used because dos has no /dev/random (see bttr thread) be newsworthy? the changes to nasm do not seem to affect the dos version either? i hope it is not necessary to start 3 separate list threads now ;-) https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/ regards, eric _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Installing FreeDOS on a USB Key
HI thanks for this great list! I was actually tinkering with 512 MB USB Sticks because I thought that there might be a difference when it comes to use TWO USB-Sticks at the same time. (like C: and D: ) I don’t know why this strategy SOMETIMES works - and sometimes it doesn’t. Maybe it has got to do with other reasons than the size of the sticks? (My thinking was - is? - : "small is better«) Any ideas? Thomas > On 06.05.2024, at 03:55, Robert Thorpe via Freedos-user > wrote: > > There are advantages to installing FreeDOS natively - it is faster. On > the other hand, I don't think there are many advantages to giving > FreeDOS gigabytes of space. DOS programs just don't need it. > > So, I installed FreeDOS on an 8GB USB pendrive. (I don't think that even > 2GB is really needed.) > > On the internet there are guides on doing this. I think I found a way > that's simpler than all of them and requires no proprietary tools. > > * Download the FreeDOS USB installer. > * Copy the img to a small (1GB) USB key. I used "dd" for this but > there are many options. > * Take another larger USB key and format it to FAT32. You can use > Windows or use mkfs.fat on Linux. > * Put a small file with a memorable name on this one. > * Setup your PC's BIOS to boot into DOS. > ** Enable Legacy boot. > ** Enable legacy option ROMs. > * Plug in both USB keys. > * Boot into the FreeDOS installer. > * Drop out of the installer and do FDISK /STATUS. > ** This should show you that the larger USB key is present. > ** This will give you a drive letter for the larger USB key. > * Change to that drive letter by typing D:, E:, or whatever. > * Check that the "small file with a memorable name" is there. > * Go back into the FreeDOS installer/package manager by typing FDIMPLES. > * Choose to install everything to the drive letter found earlier. > ** Note that if you get the drive letter wrong you could wipe over your > something you want to keep on another internal drive. > * Take out the first USB key (you can reformat it and reuse it). > * Reboot with the second USB key in place. > > I expect that some people around here know that you can do this. I'm > just archiving it for posterity so someone searching the web can find it. > > BR, > Robert Thorpe > > > _______ > 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] Installing FreeDOS on a USB Key
There are advantages to installing FreeDOS natively - it is faster. On the other hand, I don't think there are many advantages to giving FreeDOS gigabytes of space. DOS programs just don't need it. So, I installed FreeDOS on an 8GB USB pendrive. (I don't think that even 2GB is really needed.) On the internet there are guides on doing this. I think I found a way that's simpler than all of them and requires no proprietary tools. * Download the FreeDOS USB installer. * Copy the img to a small (1GB) USB key. I used "dd" for this but there are many options. * Take another larger USB key and format it to FAT32. You can use Windows or use mkfs.fat on Linux. * Put a small file with a memorable name on this one. * Setup your PC's BIOS to boot into DOS. ** Enable Legacy boot. ** Enable legacy option ROMs. * Plug in both USB keys. * Boot into the FreeDOS installer. * Drop out of the installer and do FDISK /STATUS. ** This should show you that the larger USB key is present. ** This will give you a drive letter for the larger USB key. * Change to that drive letter by typing D:, E:, or whatever. * Check that the "small file with a memorable name" is there. * Go back into the FreeDOS installer/package manager by typing FDIMPLES. * Choose to install everything to the drive letter found earlier. ** Note that if you get the drive letter wrong you could wipe over your something you want to keep on another internal drive. * Take out the first USB key (you can reformat it and reuse it). * Reboot with the second USB key in place. I expect that some people around here know that you can do this. I'm just archiving it for posterity so someone searching the web can find it. BR, Robert Thorpe _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] DOS spreadsheets
We talked about this (briefly) during today's virtual get-together: I teach a few university courses, and right now is final grades time (that's why I could stay on the video call for only an hour - lots of grading) I use LibreOffice Calc to do final grades (either =LOOKUP or =VLOOKUP) but you can actually do the same thing with a DOS spreadsheet. On Quattro Pro, you can use @VLOOKUP On As Easy As (my favorite spreadsheet) you use @VTABLE .. it's basically the same as @VLOOKUP Here's a video that walks through each method: https://youtu.be/Mqgxc7BoJUQ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] questions about installing FreeDOS on real hardware
I use a disk image, boot that from Grub and simply run/save stuff on a local Fat32 partition. I also boot Windows (rarely) which, ironically, wants to "fix" the fat partition that Linux and FreeDos are just fine with. (Which fix breaks things terribly) On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 3:58 AM Norby Droid via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 18:51 Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < > freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> “I will be installing FreeDOS 1.3 on my laptop, a Compaq Presario 42. It >> has an Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB RAM, SSD 240GB, and 14" screen. I have a >> few questions.” >> > > I use FreeDOS on real hardware here an MSI motherboard Intel Core 2 Quad > 2.66ghz with 4gb ram. 80gb sata mechanical hard drive. > >> >> “First, what is the ideal filesystem for FreeDOS? As a Linux user for >> many years, I have the habit of preparing the partitions beforehand using >> GParted. I wish to do the same here. Even more because, given the fact that >> the machine as 240GB of SSD storage, it probably doesn't make sense to >> reserve it all to FreeDOS. And, while I won't be installing any other OS on >> the machine right now, it is probably a good idea to keep my options open. >> So, to summarize, how big show the FreeDOS, and what should be its >> filesystem format (FAT, FAT32, exfat, NTFS)?” >> > > You can use goarted to format the drive, but I recomemd that you use > fdisk in freedos to do the partitioning as dos/freedos can be picky with > partitions. > > For partiton size, it all depends on what you will be usin your freedos > for. I think anything over 20 gb will be a bit much and that will give > plenty of room left for another OS, if ya choose to do that later. My > system is dedicated only to freedos and my setup has 4 partitions with 20gb > each. I do that to have each one a specific purpose, but one partition for > most people is recomended with freedos. > > FreeDOS uses either fat16 or fat32. Freedos cannot, as far as I know > boot to any other filesystem. > >> >> “Also, will the FreeDOS installer take care of installing the bootloader? >> Is there anything more specific I should be concerned with?” >> > > Yes when ya install freedos, it will handle the bootloader for you. > >> >> “I should mention that a fast boot time is a priority for this project. >> I'm already impressed with FreeDOS on VirtualBox, which got very fast once >> I commented out the parts about CD-ROMS from "fdauto.bat". In my >> estimation, FreeDOS boots in 2 to 3 seconds on Virtualbox. Is there >> anything I should watch out for in terms of making boot instantaneous?” >> > > Freedos is quite fast boot. You don’t need to do anything. > > Since you used freedos on virtualbox, ya know how freedos boots up. > Difference is on real hardware, networking and cdrom may not be detected > and work as it does on virtualbox. For my system, I have cdrom, but no > networking. > >> >> “Two more questions. First, can I swap caps with escape? As a Vim user, >> that is kinda essential. Second, will I be able to use USB to transfer >> files to and from it? That would make my life much easier.” >> > > I don’t know on the first question. > > Second question is yes, however some things to know. > > On my system, if I have a usb fat32 plugged it it automatically sees it > and I can access it so I don’t need any drivers, however on systems that > don’t do that ya will need to get usb dos drivers and set freedos up to use > them. This will have an effect of a longer boot time as it will need to > scan for usb ports and any devices on the port during bootup. > >> >> “Thanks!” >> > > You’re welcome. Enjoy. > >> >> ___________ >> 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
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
Hallo Herr Davi Ramos via Freedos-user, am Sonntag, 28. April 2024 um 05:28 schrieben Sie: > So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to install > FreeDOS. It is a *Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB RAM, SSD > 240GB, and a 14" screen.* > Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media > <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip>. > I have tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. 100 messages later we still don't know what "I cannot get it to boot" exactly means, as in a) the stick is not detected b) the stick is detected but ignored c) refuses to boot the freedos strtup files d) what does the screen look like in your failed boot attempts, or does it continue to boot from hard disk? if the stick isn't detected at all it doesn't matter if you put windows, linux or freedos on the stick or if your BIOS is running in UEFY or LEGACY mode Tom ___________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 at 16:58, Frantisek Rysanek via Freedos-user wrote: > > Dear Mr. Ramos, > > > - Balena Etcher > > - Rufus > > - Untebootin > > - Win32DiskImager. > > interestingly to me, you don't mention the trusty old `dd` ... :-) Or Ventoy, which is quicker and easier than any of them. > Have you tried looking for a BIOS update? I thought the same thing. > I have, but the HP support website does not respond to the "Presario > 427" search query. Maybe it would respond to a "product code", if > that label on the underside of the machine is still readable. It might be a Presario CQ-60 427. I found this notice: « Narrow your selection:Compaq Presario CQ60-400 Notebook PC series Compaq Presario CQ60-400 Notebook PC series - Retired ProductsThe following products have been retired and are no longer supported by HP. All official HP support content for these products has been removed from this web site. » I agree, though, it's worth a try. Davi: • You *must* use legacy boot mode. DOS cannot start on UEFI machines. • You must use MBR partitioning. • Try Ventoy, it's easier. For the filesystem, it can use FAT16 or FAT32, which to boot must be in a primary partition on the 1st drive. Yes, Linux will detect it if `os-prober` is enabled in GRUB. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven IoM: (+44) 7624 277612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884 Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053 _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
ied. I used: > > - Balena Etcher > - Rufus > - Untebootin > - Win32DiskImager. > > I'm starting to think there's something wrong with my USB drives. I > have a bunch but they're not exactly new. > > @Norby Droid mentioned floppy images... but I can see it is very > small and I won't have internet on that machine. I tried flashing the > legacy ISO but the tools say it lacks boot capabilities. > > On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 6:30 AM Bob Pryor via Freedos-user > wrote: > Post ls -l of your usb drive. > As Jim mentioned, you can not just copy the .img file to a formatted > usb. > You have to burn the image to the drive to make it bootable. > JP > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 11:27 PM Jim Hall via Freedos-user > wrote: > To confirm, you're trying to boot the USB installer: > > https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions > /1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip > > > I assume you unzipped this and wrote the image to the USB flash > drive using the right tool, and didn't just use Copy to get the file > to the drive? (I'm asking because that's a common mistake.) > > You will definitely need to use Legacy mode to boot FreeDOS. Legacy > provides a BIOS which FreeDOS needs to run. > > When you booted, did you have the USB flash drive already plugged > into the computer? Remember that DOS doesn't understand USB per se, > so you can't plug/unplug the USB flash drive after FreeDOS has > booted. > > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2024, 10:29 PM Davi Ramos via Freedos-user > wrote: > So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to > install FreeDOS. It is a Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, > 4GB RAM, SSD 240GB, and a 14" screen. > > Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media. I have > tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. Forcing it to > boot takes me back to the bios screen after a few seconds. When I > change the boot mode to "Legacy", than the flash drive simply > disappear. To the bios, it's like it doesn't exist. > > I'm not sure what the etiquette of sending files to a mailing list > is, so I uploaded the images with all the settings available on my > computer's bios. Maybe that will help. I've tried a bunch of > combinations but nothing seems to work. I was capable of booting into > antiX Linux, so it is not as if the bios won't boot anything. > > These are the images of the bios: https://imgur.com/a/pw8xJBS > > Thanks! > _______ > 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 mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media (test Bodhi Linux over Ventoy)
I realized after post that the link to TinyCore I had given is mark as not secure under Firefox. (not distributed over https) (I don't believe it to be much dangerous) but wanted to give an alternative. So I tested (on Ventoy USB key): https://psychz.dl.sourceforge.net/project/bodhilinux/5.1.0/bodhi-5.1.0-legacy.iso?viasf=1 It is 747 Mo however... and when I boot it, screen get borked, then I see a TPM error, then bork again, then black, then a bad web browser page appears with local help, that works for FreeDOS but would say we are offline on Youtube. But as it is just to make sure you can boot something... it should do. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
I suggest: https://ventoy.net/en/index.html (one of the advantage of Ventoy, is that in lower left, it shows if it booted in Clasic mode, or in UEFI mode) Use it to make your USB key "Ventoy" Try it by copying http://www.tinycorelinux.net/15.x/x86/release/TinyCore-current.iso (only 23 Mb) onto it. Now I suggest you stop trying to install with the USB image, and rather copy the iso image inside of: https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-LiveCD.zip Copy the iso file also on the Ventoyify USB key._______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
Plop (www.plop.at) helps to boot legacy usb, it works in laptops with ancient usb ports, maybe works with your setup. The only problem that I found is that freedos starts in read only mode. Yahoo Mail: busca, organiza, toma el control de tu buzón El dom., 28 de abr. de 2024 a la(s) 8:07 a. m., Davi Ramos via Freedos-user escribió: ___ 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] cannot boot installation media
So, that computer came with Linux, and it has a GPT partition scheme. Do you think it would help to convert it to a msdos partition scheme? I mean in theory it should boot regardless? On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 7:28 AM Eric Auer via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > Hi! Not all USB sticks are enabled for booting. And maybe it is disabled > in your BIOS setup. The MBR of the stick may matter as well, and whether > you boot UEFI style (not possible with FreeDOS) or classic style ;-) > > > > > _______ > 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] cannot boot installation media
The bios in my machine has a section called "boot override" which works in the same however, I also used the boot menu outside of the bios setup and result was the same. Em dom, 28 de abr de 2024 08:33, tom ehlert via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> escreveu: > > > Eh... I tried every single BIOS setting > > at least on my Dell notebook there is no such *setting*. > > instead I have to hit F12 while booting, this then sends me to a "select > boot device", > where I can tell it to boot from USB > > Tom > > > > _______ > 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] cannot boot installation media
> Eh... I tried every single BIOS setting at least on my Dell notebook there is no such *setting*. instead I have to hit F12 while booting, this then sends me to a "select boot device", where I can tell it to boot from USB Tom _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
I found Rufus to be the best option for creating a bootable usb drive for freeDOS in all my trials. Booting to usb on any system can be a challenge. I know on one laptop we have it is a Windows 10 (originally Windows 8) it absolutely refuses to boot into ANY usb unless we remove the hard drive. Just to verify, not be annoying, when ya boot up the laptop, ya press the F10 key (maybe repeatedly) until ya get a menu askin what to boot to. The boot my be separate or listed under hard drive depending on the bios. Select the usb device and see if it boots. If not do ya get an error similiar to “no bootable device found”? On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 06:37 Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Eh... I tried every single BIOS setting that might be even slightly > relevant. I created the USB sticks with the programs which are recommended > for me to use. I ordered 3 USB sticks of different brands. I devoted 24 > hours to make this work already. If the new sticks don't work, I think > I'll, unfortunately have install Linux and move on with life :( > > On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 7:28 AM Eric Auer via Freedos-user < > freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> >> Hi! Not all USB sticks are enabled for booting. And maybe it is disabled >> in your BIOS setup. The MBR of the stick may matter as well, and whether >> you boot UEFI style (not possible with FreeDOS) or classic style ;-) >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> 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
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
Eh... I tried every single BIOS setting that might be even slightly relevant. I created the USB sticks with the programs which are recommended for me to use. I ordered 3 USB sticks of different brands. I devoted 24 hours to make this work already. If the new sticks don't work, I think I'll, unfortunately have install Linux and move on with life :( On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 7:28 AM Eric Auer via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > Hi! Not all USB sticks are enabled for booting. And maybe it is disabled > in your BIOS setup. The MBR of the stick may matter as well, and whether > you boot UEFI style (not possible with FreeDOS) or classic style ;-) > > > > > _______ > 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] cannot boot installation media
Hi! Not all USB sticks are enabled for booting. And maybe it is disabled in your BIOS setup. The MBR of the stick may matter as well, and whether you boot UEFI style (not possible with FreeDOS) or classic style ;-) ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
Thank you Bob and @Norby Droid . I am aware of that, I didn't just copy the files to the USB stick. As I was trying multiple methods, I used a variety of programs to generate the half-a-dozen bootable drives that I tried. I used: - Balena Etcher - Rufus - Untebootin - Win32DiskImager. I'm starting to think there's something wrong with my USB drives. I have a bunch but they're not exactly new. @Norby Droid mentioned floppy images... but I can see it is very small and I won't have internet on that machine. I tried flashing the legacy ISO but the tools say it lacks boot capabilities. On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 6:30 AM Bob Pryor via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Post ls -l of your usb drive. > As Jim mentioned, you can not just copy the .img file to a formatted usb. > You have to burn the image to the drive to make it bootable. > JP > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 11:27 PM Jim Hall via Freedos-user < > freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> To confirm, you're trying to boot the USB installer: >> >> >> https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip >> >> >> I assume you unzipped this and wrote the image to the USB flash drive >> using the right tool, and didn't just use Copy to get the file to the >> drive? (I'm asking because that's a common mistake.) >> >> You will definitely need to use Legacy mode to boot FreeDOS. Legacy >> provides a BIOS which FreeDOS needs to run. >> >> When you booted, did you have the USB flash drive already plugged into >> the computer? Remember that DOS doesn't understand USB per se, so you can't >> plug/unplug the USB flash drive after FreeDOS has booted. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2024, 10:29 PM Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < >> freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: >> >>> So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to >>> install FreeDOS. It is a *Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB >>> RAM, SSD 240GB, and a 14" screen.* >>> >>> Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media >>> <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip>. >>> I have tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. Forcing it to >>> boot takes me back to the bios screen after a few seconds. When I change >>> the boot mode to "Legacy", than the flash drive simply disappear. To the >>> bios, it's like it doesn't exist. >>> >>> I'm not sure what the etiquette of sending files to a mailing list is, >>> so I uploaded the images with all the settings available on my computer's >>> bios. Maybe that will help. I've tried a bunch of combinations but nothing >>> seems to work. I was capable of booting into antiX Linux, so it is not as >>> if the bios won't boot anything. >>> >>> These are the images of the bios: https://imgur.com/a/pw8xJBS >>> >>> Thanks! >>> _______ >>> 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 mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
Post ls -l of your usb drive. As Jim mentioned, you can not just copy the .img file to a formatted usb. You have to burn the image to the drive to make it bootable. JP On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 11:27 PM Jim Hall via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > To confirm, you're trying to boot the USB installer: > > > https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip > > > I assume you unzipped this and wrote the image to the USB flash drive > using the right tool, and didn't just use Copy to get the file to the > drive? (I'm asking because that's a common mistake.) > > You will definitely need to use Legacy mode to boot FreeDOS. Legacy > provides a BIOS which FreeDOS needs to run. > > When you booted, did you have the USB flash drive already plugged into the > computer? Remember that DOS doesn't understand USB per se, so you can't > plug/unplug the USB flash drive after FreeDOS has booted. > > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2024, 10:29 PM Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < > freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to >> install FreeDOS. It is a *Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB >> RAM, SSD 240GB, and a 14" screen.* >> >> Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media >> <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip>. >> I have tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. Forcing it to >> boot takes me back to the bios screen after a few seconds. When I change >> the boot mode to "Legacy", than the flash drive simply disappear. To the >> bios, it's like it doesn't exist. >> >> I'm not sure what the etiquette of sending files to a mailing list is, so >> I uploaded the images with all the settings available on my computer's >> bios. Maybe that will help. I've tried a bunch of combinations but nothing >> seems to work. I was capable of booting into antiX Linux, so it is not as >> if the bios won't boot anything. >> >> These are the images of the bios: https://imgur.com/a/pw8xJBS >> >> Thanks! >> ___________ >> 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
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
On the download page, try gettin the floppy version. On real hardware ya may need to use an external drive, or built-in cdrom/drdrom drive if one is available. Also ya need to go in your bios and make sure that the usb is setup as your first boot item. Find the key for your bot options, i believe f10 on compaq/hp systems amd pres that during boot to select the usb device. By default computers are made to boot to the onboard drive and ya need to select usb on the boot menu or set up in bios to use it. On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 23:30 Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to > install FreeDOS. It is a *Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB > RAM, SSD 240GB, and a 14" screen.* > > Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media > <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip>. > I have tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. Forcing it to > boot takes me back to the bios screen after a few seconds. When I change > the boot mode to "Legacy", than the flash drive simply disappear. To the > bios, it's like it doesn't exist. > > I'm not sure what the etiquette of sending files to a mailing list is, so > I uploaded the images with all the settings available on my computer's > bios. Maybe that will help. I've tried a bunch of combinations but nothing > seems to work. I was capable of booting into antiX Linux, so it is not as > if the bios won't boot anything. > > These are the images of the bios: https://imgur.com/a/pw8xJBS > > Thanks! > ___ > 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] questions about installing FreeDOS on real hardware
On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 18:51 Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hi! > > “I will be installing FreeDOS 1.3 on my laptop, a Compaq Presario 42. It > has an Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB RAM, SSD 240GB, and 14" screen. I have a > few questions.” > I use FreeDOS on real hardware here an MSI motherboard Intel Core 2 Quad 2.66ghz with 4gb ram. 80gb sata mechanical hard drive. > > “First, what is the ideal filesystem for FreeDOS? As a Linux user for many > years, I have the habit of preparing the partitions beforehand using > GParted. I wish to do the same here. Even more because, given the fact that > the machine as 240GB of SSD storage, it probably doesn't make sense to > reserve it all to FreeDOS. And, while I won't be installing any other OS on > the machine right now, it is probably a good idea to keep my options open. > So, to summarize, how big show the FreeDOS, and what should be its > filesystem format (FAT, FAT32, exfat, NTFS)?” > You can use goarted to format the drive, but I recomemd that you use fdisk in freedos to do the partitioning as dos/freedos can be picky with partitions. For partiton size, it all depends on what you will be usin your freedos for. I think anything over 20 gb will be a bit much and that will give plenty of room left for another OS, if ya choose to do that later. My system is dedicated only to freedos and my setup has 4 partitions with 20gb each. I do that to have each one a specific purpose, but one partition for most people is recomended with freedos. FreeDOS uses either fat16 or fat32. Freedos cannot, as far as I know boot to any other filesystem. > > “Also, will the FreeDOS installer take care of installing the bootloader? > Is there anything more specific I should be concerned with?” > Yes when ya install freedos, it will handle the bootloader for you. > > “I should mention that a fast boot time is a priority for this project. > I'm already impressed with FreeDOS on VirtualBox, which got very fast once > I commented out the parts about CD-ROMS from "fdauto.bat". In my > estimation, FreeDOS boots in 2 to 3 seconds on Virtualbox. Is there > anything I should watch out for in terms of making boot instantaneous?” > Freedos is quite fast boot. You don’t need to do anything. Since you used freedos on virtualbox, ya know how freedos boots up. Difference is on real hardware, networking and cdrom may not be detected and work as it does on virtualbox. For my system, I have cdrom, but no networking. > > “Two more questions. First, can I swap caps with escape? As a Vim user, > that is kinda essential. Second, will I be able to use USB to transfer > files to and from it? That would make my life much easier.” > I don’t know on the first question. Second question is yes, however some things to know. On my system, if I have a usb fat32 plugged it it automatically sees it and I can access it so I don’t need any drivers, however on systems that don’t do that ya will need to get usb dos drivers and set freedos up to use them. This will have an effect of a longer boot time as it will need to scan for usb ports and any devices on the port during bootup. > > “Thanks!” > You’re welcome. Enjoy. > > _______ > 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] cannot boot installation media
Thanks! Yes, that is the image I downloaded. I did extract the image from the zip file (FD13FULL.img). It is plugged in before boot. On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 1:29 AM Jim Hall via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > To confirm, you're trying to boot the USB installer: > > > https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip > > > I assume you unzipped this and wrote the image to the USB flash drive > using the right tool, and didn't just use Copy to get the file to the > drive? (I'm asking because that's a common mistake.) > > You will definitely need to use Legacy mode to boot FreeDOS. Legacy > provides a BIOS which FreeDOS needs to run. > > When you booted, did you have the USB flash drive already plugged into the > computer? Remember that DOS doesn't understand USB per se, so you can't > plug/unplug the USB flash drive after FreeDOS has booted. > > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2024, 10:29 PM Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < > freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to >> install FreeDOS. It is a *Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB >> RAM, SSD 240GB, and a 14" screen.* >> >> Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media >> <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip>. >> I have tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. Forcing it to >> boot takes me back to the bios screen after a few seconds. When I change >> the boot mode to "Legacy", than the flash drive simply disappear. To the >> bios, it's like it doesn't exist. >> >> I'm not sure what the etiquette of sending files to a mailing list is, so >> I uploaded the images with all the settings available on my computer's >> bios. Maybe that will help. I've tried a bunch of combinations but nothing >> seems to work. I was capable of booting into antiX Linux, so it is not as >> if the bios won't boot anything. >> >> These are the images of the bios: https://imgur.com/a/pw8xJBS >> >> Thanks! >> ___________ >> 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
Re: [Freedos-user] cannot boot installation media
To confirm, you're trying to boot the USB installer: https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip I assume you unzipped this and wrote the image to the USB flash drive using the right tool, and didn't just use Copy to get the file to the drive? (I'm asking because that's a common mistake.) You will definitely need to use Legacy mode to boot FreeDOS. Legacy provides a BIOS which FreeDOS needs to run. When you booted, did you have the USB flash drive already plugged into the computer? Remember that DOS doesn't understand USB per se, so you can't plug/unplug the USB flash drive after FreeDOS has booted. On Sat, Apr 27, 2024, 10:29 PM Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to > install FreeDOS. It is a *Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB > RAM, SSD 240GB, and a 14" screen.* > > Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media > <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip>. > I have tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. Forcing it to > boot takes me back to the bios screen after a few seconds. When I change > the boot mode to "Legacy", than the flash drive simply disappear. To the > bios, it's like it doesn't exist. > > I'm not sure what the etiquette of sending files to a mailing list is, so > I uploaded the images with all the settings available on my computer's > bios. Maybe that will help. I've tried a bunch of combinations but nothing > seems to work. I was capable of booting into antiX Linux, so it is not as > if the bios won't boot anything. > > These are the images of the bios: https://imgur.com/a/pw8xJBS > > Thanks! > ___ > 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] cannot boot installation media
So, as I said in another message, I have a computer where I wish to install FreeDOS. It is a *Compaq Presario 427, Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB RAM, SSD 240GB, and a 14" screen.* Unfortunately, I cannot get it to boot the installation media <https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.3/official/FD13-FullUSB.zip>. I have tried numerous USB flash drives as well as an SD card. Forcing it to boot takes me back to the bios screen after a few seconds. When I change the boot mode to "Legacy", than the flash drive simply disappear. To the bios, it's like it doesn't exist. I'm not sure what the etiquette of sending files to a mailing list is, so I uploaded the images with all the settings available on my computer's bios. Maybe that will help. I've tried a bunch of combinations but nothing seems to work. I was capable of booting into antiX Linux, so it is not as if the bios won't boot anything. These are the images of the bios: https://imgur.com/a/pw8xJBS Thanks! _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] questions about installing FreeDOS on real hardware
Oh! Suppose I install FreeDOS and later a Linux distribution. Will GRUB acknowledge and launch FreeDOS ? On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 7:50 PM Davi Ramos wrote: > Hi! > > I will be installing FreeDOS 1.3 on my laptop, a Compaq Presario 42. It > has an Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB RAM, SSD 240GB, and 14" screen. I have a > few questions. > > First, what is the ideal filesystem for FreeDOS? As a Linux user for many > years, I have the habit of preparing the partitions beforehand using > GParted. I wish to do the same here. Even more because, given the fact that > the machine as 240GB of SSD storage, it probably doesn't make sense to > reserve it all to FreeDOS. And, while I won't be installing any other OS on > the machine right now, it is probably a good idea to keep my options open. > So, to summarize, how big show the FreeDOS, and what should be its > filesystem format (FAT, FAT32, exfat, NTFS)? > > Also, will the FreeDOS installer take care of installing the bootloader? > Is there anything more specific I should be concerned with? > > I should mention that a fast boot time is a priority for this project. I'm > already impressed with FreeDOS on VirtualBox, which got very fast once I > commented out the parts about CD-ROMS from "fdauto.bat". In my estimation, > FreeDOS boots in 2 to 3 seconds on Virtualbox. Is there anything I should > watch out for in terms of making boot instantaneous? > > Two more questions. First, can I swap caps with escape? As a Vim user, > that is kinda essential. Second, will I be able to use USB to transfer > files to and from it? That would make my life much easier. > > Thanks! > ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] questions about installing FreeDOS on real hardware
Hi! I will be installing FreeDOS 1.3 on my laptop, a Compaq Presario 42. It has an Intel Pentium N3700, 4GB RAM, SSD 240GB, and 14" screen. I have a few questions. First, what is the ideal filesystem for FreeDOS? As a Linux user for many years, I have the habit of preparing the partitions beforehand using GParted. I wish to do the same here. Even more because, given the fact that the machine as 240GB of SSD storage, it probably doesn't make sense to reserve it all to FreeDOS. And, while I won't be installing any other OS on the machine right now, it is probably a good idea to keep my options open. So, to summarize, how big show the FreeDOS, and what should be its filesystem format (FAT, FAT32, exfat, NTFS)? Also, will the FreeDOS installer take care of installing the bootloader? Is there anything more specific I should be concerned with? I should mention that a fast boot time is a priority for this project. I'm already impressed with FreeDOS on VirtualBox, which got very fast once I commented out the parts about CD-ROMS from "fdauto.bat". In my estimation, FreeDOS boots in 2 to 3 seconds on Virtualbox. Is there anything I should watch out for in terms of making boot instantaneous? Two more questions. First, can I swap caps with escape? As a Vim user, that is kinda essential. Second, will I be able to use USB to transfer files to and from it? That would make my life much easier. Thanks! _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] MSD freedos diagnostic comparative?
This may indeed be the ticket. Although I will need to email and ask how to write the output to a file as a command line option..it is not shared when getting help for the program. Thanks, Karen On Sat, 27 Apr 2024, Jim Hall via Freedos-user wrote: Laaca posted about a new system info tool they'd written, described here: https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/2024/03/fetch4fd-system-info-program/ On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 00:43 Karen Lewellen via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: Hi all, simple question. Given freedos does support things like larger hard drives and so forth, I am wondering if there is a simple tool comparative to msd for DOS among freedos utilities? or, if anyone knows of a simple tool? my goal is not so much diagnostics as a clear indicator of machine stats, the way msd provides, processor speed, type of video card, number of drives, memory, irq allocations, those sorts of things. the tech behind my new machine has a new job, and was not solid enough in DOS to provide these details..and I have what may be a failing power supply I cannot replace until I know how much power is best. ideas? even a DOS port of Linux tool? Thanks, KarenL ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] MSD freedos diagnostic comparative?
Laaca posted about a new system info tool they'd written, described here: https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/2024/03/fetch4fd-system-info-program/ > On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 00:43 Karen Lewellen via Freedos-user < > freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> simple question. >> Given freedos does support things like larger hard drives and so forth, >> I >> am wondering if there is a simple tool comparative to msd for DOS among >> freedos utilities? >> or, if anyone knows of a simple tool? >> my goal is not so much diagnostics as a clear indicator of machine >> stats, >> the way msd provides, processor speed, type of video card, number of >> drives, >> memory, irq allocations, those sorts of things. >> the tech behind my new machine has a new job, and was not solid enough in >> DOS to provide these details..and I have what may be a failing power >> supply I cannot replace until I know how much power is best. >> ideas? >> even a DOS port of Linux tool? >> Thanks, >> KarenL >> > _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] MSD freedos diagnostic comparative?
There is a program called HWInfo for DOS that may be what ya lookin for. It gives alot of info on your hardware. Unless I a, mistaken, it is freeware. One thing, though is under freedos (on my system) it reports I am runnin under win95/OS/2, or DOS Mode. Still works fine. Also gives a warning bout running in v86 mode because of expanded menory. I would check that out. On Sat, Apr 27, 2024 at 00:43 Karen Lewellen via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hi all, > simple question. > Given freedos does support things like larger hard drives and so forth, I > am wondering if there is a simple tool comparative to msd for DOS among > freedos utilities? > or, if anyone knows of a simple tool? > my goal is not so much diagnostics as a clear indicator of machine stats, > the way msd provides, processor speed, type of video card, number of > drives, > memory, irq allocations, those sorts of things. > the tech behind my new machine has a new job, and was not solid enough in > DOS to provide these details..and I have what may be a failing power > supply I cannot replace until I know how much power is best. > ideas? > even a DOS port of Linux tool? > Thanks, > Karen > > > > > _______ > 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] MSD freedos diagnostic comparative?
Hi all, simple question. Given freedos does support things like larger hard drives and so forth, I am wondering if there is a simple tool comparative to msd for DOS among freedos utilities? or, if anyone knows of a simple tool? my goal is not so much diagnostics as a clear indicator of machine stats, the way msd provides, processor speed, type of video card, number of drives, memory, irq allocations, those sorts of things. the tech behind my new machine has a new job, and was not solid enough in DOS to provide these details..and I have what may be a failing power supply I cannot replace until I know how much power is best. ideas? even a DOS port of Linux tool? Thanks, Karen ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] How to make FreeDOS display correctly the ã character
Frantisek Rysanek said: > If that's true, I would call this a > bug in the FreeDOS EGA.CPX ...? > Just fabulating, I haven't > analyzed this deeper. It is not a bug in FreeDOS, but a bug in codepage 850. ã is missing from it in every DOS I looked at. _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] networking over 86box
Le Wed, 24 Apr 2024 16:05:10 -0400 Brandon Taylor via Freedos-user a écrit > My apologies for the confusion. I know FreeDOS has internet capability, but > not on 86Box, since FreeDOS for some reason treats 86Box as if it were a > real computer. > > GetOutlook for Android > From: Robert Riebisch via Freedos-user freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 2:04:17 PM > To: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> > Cc: Robert Riebisch r...@bttr-software.de> > Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation? > Hi Brandon, > > > Since FreeDOS doesn't support physical network hardware (even if it's > > emulated in a program like PCem or 86Box), I figure there's no way > > FreeDOS is gonna be able to connect to the Internet, right? Well... Frankly, using networking over 86box seems harder than on QEMU... where I have posted some weeks ago the line I use to have the networking emulated. You would need to read: https://86box.readthedocs.io/en/latest/hardware/network.html that shows that the default is to drop all network information. Slirp seems easier to select but not really what you want (because it seems to request a program to connect to internet) pCap seems what you would want... but then need some additional program than 86box. _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS display correctly the â
> I also had this problem, For some reason, the ã > is missing from codepage 850. If that's true, I would call this a bug in the FreeDOS EGA.CPX ...? Just fabulating, I haven't analyzed this deeper. Frank ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation
Robert Riebisch said: > This collection of **packet drivers** is still available at > <http://crynwr.com/drivers/>. And packet drivers are typically for > Ethernet network cards, not modems. Thank you for pointing that most modems do not need device drivers. I had not used one for over 10 years. External modems mostly use a COM port and internal ones emulate one in hardware/firmware. But they still need dialers and use packet drivers for internet access. This is what LSPPP and DOSPPP are all about. Maybe there aren"t PPP packet drivers in Crynwr; I did not look. This is, however, a digression from the Brandon Taylor problem. Why does he want to use dial-up emulation for internet access? He did not mention what kind of physical network his computer is connected to, _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS display correctly the â
Hello. Thank you, i'll switch on my laptop. On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 1:18 AM Jose Senna via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > I also had this problem, For some reason, the ã > is missing from codepage 850. I use codepage 860 > instead, which is the "official" Portuguese codepage. > Or you may use Windows-1252 codepage, if this is > available. > > > > ___________ > 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] How can I make FreeDOS display correctly the â
I also had this problem, For some reason, the ã is missing from codepage 850. I use codepage 860 instead, which is the "official" Portuguese codepage. Or you may use Windows-1252 codepage, if this is available. _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Hello. So, whats the code for Portugal Portuguese? Thank you. On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 6:43 PM Jim Hall via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Davi Ramos wrote: > >> > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words > >> > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". > >> > > >> > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for > >> > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated > >> > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". > >> > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: > >> > oIh6TW8.png > >> > > >> > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? > > > Vacek Nules wrote: > > > > Hi Davi, > > > > Your codepage is probably set to CP437, which does not contain the > > "ã" character. Change your codepage to CP850 (or CP858 if you also > > need the Euro sign) and try again. > > > That's what I was going to suggest too. Looks like Brazilian > Portuguese is codepage 850? So I think Davi also needs to enter these > commands to set up the display for 850: > > display con=(ega,850,1) > mode con cp prep=((850) C:\freedos\cpi\ega.cpx) > > > _______ > 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] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
That did it! "ã" and other tilde-accentuated characters are displaying perfectly now. Thanks! Although I cannot say I understand the fix, it did work and now all tilde-accentuated characters work fine everywhere in FreeDOS. I had to change "fdos" to "freedos" since that is how the directory is actually called on this version. I added the fix to FDAUTO.BAT, which I assume is FreeDOS version of AUTOEXEC.BAT. LH DISPLAY CON=(EGA,,1) > MODE CON CP PREP=((858) C:\FREEDOS\cpi\EGA.CPX) > MODE CON CP SEL=858 Is that an okay place to put those settings? Thanks! On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 3:41 PM Eric Auer via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > Hi Robert and Davi, > > >> The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for > >> Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated > >> characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". > >> However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: > >> oIh6TW8.png > >> > >> How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? > > You probably have to load DISPLAY and use MODE to set the codepage > to load a font which has all accented characters at the place where > your already Brazilian keyboard configuration expects them :-) > > See the HTMLHELP system for details. There should also be some > examples on the web. It should work similar to this: > > First, load the DISPLAY thing. You can do this in your autoexec > to load it automatically at boot, or manually at the prompt: > > LH DISPLAY CON=(EGA,,1) > rem or maybe for example DISPLAY CON=(EGA,858,1) or similar? > > Second, use MODE CON CODEPAGE (shorthand MODE CON CP also > works) to first prepare (shorthand PREP) and then select > (shorthand SEL) the codepage for your country. > > In my example the codepage is 858, which happens to be in > EGA.CPX, which is a compressed version of EGA.CPI - some > less common codepages will probably be in other CPX files. > > MODE CON CP PREP=((858) C:\FDOS\cpi\EGA.CPX) > > MODE CON CP SEL=858 > > You can do those two MODE invocations in autoexec or at > the prompt as well. You can use MODE /? for help, too. > > The internet says that Brazilians prefer codepage 860 :-) > > Regards, Eric > > > 1) How do you enter "ã"? > > 2) Is that a separate key on your keyboard? > > 3) What does > > https://bootablecd.de/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base/keycode.htm > > produce, when you hit that key or key combo? > > Interesting questions :-) Maybe all falls into place with CP860. > > > > > _______ > 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] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Unfortunately, after entering the following: display con=(ega,850,1) mode con cp prep=((850) C:\freedos\cpi\ega.cpx) There was no alteration in the displaying of "ã". On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 3:43 PM Jim Hall via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Davi Ramos wrote: > >> > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words > >> > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". > >> > > >> > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for > >> > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated > >> > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". > >> > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: > >> > oIh6TW8.png > >> > > >> > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? > > > Vacek Nules wrote: > > > > Hi Davi, > > > > Your codepage is probably set to CP437, which does not contain the > > "ã" character. Change your codepage to CP850 (or CP858 if you also > > need the Euro sign) and try again. > > > That's what I was going to suggest too. Looks like Brazilian > Portuguese is codepage 850? So I think Davi also needs to enter these > commands to set up the display for 850: > > display con=(ega,850,1) > mode con cp prep=((850) C:\freedos\cpi\ega.cpx) > > > _______ > 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] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
I tried the commands. "MODE CON CP SELECT=858" and "MODE CON CP SELECT=850". The "ã" still displays as that weird character. On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 3:39 PM Vacek Nules via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hi Davi, > > Your codepage is probably set to CP437, which does not contain the "ã" > character. Change your codepage to CP850 (or CP858 if you also need the > Euro sign) and try again. > > Cheers, > Vacek > > > Robert Riebisch via Freedos-user ezt > írta (időpont: 2024. ápr. 25., Csü 20:29): > >> Hi Davi, >> >> > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words >> > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". >> > >> > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for >> > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated >> > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". >> > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: >> > oIh6TW8.png >> > >> > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? >> >> 1) How do you enter "ã"? >> 2) Is that a separate key on your keyboard? >> 3) What does >> <https://bootablecd.de/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base/keycode.htm> >> produce, when you hit that key or key combo? >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> -- >> BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ >> DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ >> >> >> _______ >> 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
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Sorry, but how can I change my codepage? I don't really know what that is. Thanks! On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 3:39 PM Vacek Nules via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Hi Davi, > > Your codepage is probably set to CP437, which does not contain the "ã" > character. Change your codepage to CP850 (or CP858 if you also need the > Euro sign) and try again. > > Cheers, > Vacek > > > Robert Riebisch via Freedos-user ezt > írta (időpont: 2024. ápr. 25., Csü 20:29): > >> Hi Davi, >> >> > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words >> > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". >> > >> > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for >> > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated >> > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". >> > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: >> > oIh6TW8.png >> > >> > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? >> >> 1) How do you enter "ã"? >> 2) Is that a separate key on your keyboard? >> 3) What does >> <https://bootablecd.de/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base/keycode.htm> >> produce, when you hit that key or key combo? >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> -- >> BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ >> DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ >> >> >> ___ >> 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
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
1. I enter "ã" by typing the "~ ^" followed by the "a" key. Resulting in
"ã".
2. Yes, it is a separate key on my keyboard. By itself, that key will
generate the tilde. With shift, it generates the "little hat" (circumflex),
which is used in words such as "ângulo" or "acadêmico". The circumflex
displays perfectly on FreeDOS, the tilde ("~") does not.
3. "keycode" generates "Bad command or filename". I'm not sure how to
install this command, I'm looking at fdimples and it is not immediately
obvious :/. Is there a way to get it installed I am not aware of?
Thanks!
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 3:31 PM Robert Riebisch via Freedos-user <
freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Hi Davi,
>
> > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words
> > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão".
> >
> > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for
> > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated
> > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô".
> > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below:
> > oIh6TW8.png
> >
> > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters?
>
> 1) How do you enter "ã"?
> 2) Is that a separate key on your keyboard?
> 3) What does
> <https://bootablecd.de/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base/keycode.htm>
> produce, when you hit that key or key combo?
>
> Cheers,
> Robert
> --
> BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/
> DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/
>
>
> _______
> 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] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Let me suggest the following hypothesis: Your FreeDOS and graphical hardware is running with the HW-default code page, known as Code Page 437. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_page_437 Whereas, you're trying to display text encoded in CP850. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_page_850 CP850, aka PC Latin 1, which is not the same as ISO Latin 1. Perhaps your keyboard is already switched to produce CP850. You probably need to run some program(s) to load the right codepage into the graphics card. I don't have a ready-made and tested recipe for you... could be something like: In config.sys: COUNTRY=055,850,C:\FDOS\BIN\COUNTRY.SYS In autoexec.bat: DISPLAY CON=(EGA,850,2) MODE CON CP PREP=(437,850) C:\FDOS\BIN\EGA.CPX) MODE CON CP SEL=850 maybe also: CHCP 850 Further reading: https://gitlab.com/FreeDOS/base/cpidos/-/tree/master/DOC/CPIDOS http://home.mnet-online.de/willybilly/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base /display.htm http://home.mnet-online.de/willybilly/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/comm and/chcp.htm http://home.mnet-online.de/willybilly/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base /cpidos.htm http://home.mnet-online.de/willybilly/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/cnfi gsys/country.htm https://marc.info/?l=freedos-dev=99788711909602 (examples look more like MS-DOS than FreeDOS) Frank > > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in > words such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". > > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: > oIh6TW8.png > > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? > > Thanks! _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] shouldn't fdimples add programs to path?
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 9:51 AM Davi Ramos via Freedos-user wrote: > > I installed a bunch of stuff (all editors) but when I try to run > them it doesn't seem like they're on the path. Is that the correct > behavior? Should I manually add the bins to path? If so, how? Some larger DOS applications from the 1980s and 1990s would offer to do that for you, but not always. Generally, the tradeoff is that if you have a bunch of possible paths in your PATH variable, you can overload it. If every package added a path to the PATH variable, that could get very long. Also, this could confuse things. For example, I like to install a few compilers on my FreeDOS system, like IA16 GCC and OpenWatcom. If I'm developing in IA16 GCC, I set my PATH variable (and a few other variables) so I can use IA16 GCC. If I'm working in OpenWatcom, I set my PATH variable (and a few others) so I can use OpenWatcom. I'm not likely to be developing in both at the same time, though - and I don't need to compile stuff every time I boot FreeDOS - so I don't load those values in my PATH by default. If you need a path added to your PATH, and it didn't get added for you, you can just edit the FDAUTO.BAT file yourself. You can also type the PATH command on the command line to experiment before you edit your FDAUTO file. For example, I have FED (programmer's text editor) installed on my system but I don't have it in my PATH. FED is installed in C:\APPS\FED by default, and the program name is FED.EXE. To add FED to the PATH, I could type this at the command line: > PATH C:\freedos\bin;C:\apps\fed That sets a completely new PATH variable that says "look in C:\freedos\bin first .. then look in C:\apps\fed" when running programs. So with this PATH set, when I try to run FED.EXE on the command line, FreeDOS will first try to execute any FED.EXE in the current directory (because it always looks in the current dir first) then will try to run C:\freedos\bin\FED.EXE - but FED isn't there, so it will then try to run C:\apps\fed\FED.EXE (and that will work, because that's where FED.EXE lives). If you already have a bunch of things in your PATH variable and you don't want to retype the whole thing just to add one new entry to your PATH, you can use the %PATH% variable expansion like this: Let's say my PATH was already set to C:\freedos\bin;C:\freedos\links .. if I wanted to add C:\apps\fed to the end of that, I can type this: > PATH %PATH%;C:\apps\fed Now the new value of PATH is C:\freedos\bin;C:\freedos\links;C:\apps\fed _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Davi Ramos wrote: >> > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words >> > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". >> > >> > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for >> > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated >> > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". >> > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: >> > oIh6TW8.png >> > >> > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? Vacek Nules wrote: > > Hi Davi, > > Your codepage is probably set to CP437, which does not contain the > "ã" character. Change your codepage to CP850 (or CP858 if you also > need the Euro sign) and try again. That's what I was going to suggest too. Looks like Brazilian Portuguese is codepage 850? So I think Davi also needs to enter these commands to set up the display for 850: display con=(ega,850,1) mode con cp prep=((850) C:\freedos\cpi\ega.cpx) ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Hi Robert and Davi, The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: oIh6TW8.png How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? You probably have to load DISPLAY and use MODE to set the codepage to load a font which has all accented characters at the place where your already Brazilian keyboard configuration expects them :-) See the HTMLHELP system for details. There should also be some examples on the web. It should work similar to this: First, load the DISPLAY thing. You can do this in your autoexec to load it automatically at boot, or manually at the prompt: LH DISPLAY CON=(EGA,,1) rem or maybe for example DISPLAY CON=(EGA,858,1) or similar? Second, use MODE CON CODEPAGE (shorthand MODE CON CP also works) to first prepare (shorthand PREP) and then select (shorthand SEL) the codepage for your country. In my example the codepage is 858, which happens to be in EGA.CPX, which is a compressed version of EGA.CPI - some less common codepages will probably be in other CPX files. MODE CON CP PREP=((858) C:\FDOS\cpi\EGA.CPX) MODE CON CP SEL=858 You can do those two MODE invocations in autoexec or at the prompt as well. You can use MODE /? for help, too. The internet says that Brazilians prefer codepage 860 :-) Regards, Eric 1) How do you enter "ã"? 2) Is that a separate key on your keyboard? 3) What does https://bootablecd.de/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base/keycode.htm produce, when you hit that key or key combo? Interesting questions :-) Maybe all falls into place with CP860. _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Hi Davi, Your codepage is probably set to CP437, which does not contain the "ã" character. Change your codepage to CP850 (or CP858 if you also need the Euro sign) and try again. Cheers, Vacek Robert Riebisch via Freedos-user ezt írta (időpont: 2024. ápr. 25., Csü 20:29): > Hi Davi, > > > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words > > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". > > > > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for > > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated > > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". > > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: > > oIh6TW8.png > > > > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? > > 1) How do you enter "ã"? > 2) Is that a separate key on your keyboard? > 3) What does > <https://bootablecd.de/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base/keycode.htm> > produce, when you hit that key or key combo? > > Cheers, > Robert > -- > BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ > DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ > > > ___________ > 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] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
Hi Davi, > The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words > such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". > > The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for > Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated > characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". > However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: > oIh6TW8.png > > How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? 1) How do you enter "ã"? 2) Is that a separate key on your keyboard? 3) What does <https://bootablecd.de/fdhelp-internet/en/hhstndrd/base/keycode.htm> produce, when you hit that key or key combo? Cheers, Robert -- BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ _______ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] How can I make FreeDOS correctly display the "ã" character?
The "ã" is a very common character in Portuguese. It shows up in words such as "não", "alçapão", and "órgão". The system's keyboard and layout are already configured to "br" (for Brazilian Portuguese) and working perfectly. Other accentuated characters display just fine. That is the case of "á", "à", "ô". However, "ã" shows as something else entirely. Image below: [image: oIh6TW8.png] How can I get FreeDOS to correctly display those characters? Thanks! ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] shouldn't fdimples add programs to path?
For most used programs I would ad an alias in the fdauto.bat file so far this has worked perfectly and doesn’t fill up the path line. Fdimples just installs software anddoesn’t add them to any path or anything. If I am wrong someone can correct me. On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 10:51 Davi Ramos via Freedos-user < freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > I installed a bunch of stuff (all editors) but when I try to run them it > doesn't seem like they're on the path. Is that the correct behavior? Should > I manually add the bins to path? If so, how? > > Thanks! > _______ > 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] shouldn't fdimples add programs to path?
I installed a bunch of stuff (all editors) but when I try to run them it doesn't seem like they're on the path. Is that the correct behavior? Should I manually add the bins to path? If so, how? Thanks! ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation?
Here is a neat summary of the DOS PPP drivers: http://www.oldskool.org/guides/tvdog/internet.html#I ...but, someone has already raised this question: Do you have a "counterpart"? I mean - a dial-in service answering with a modem and a PPP stack. Or at least a null-modem connection to a PPP "server", such as pppd running on Linux. Or possibly Windows running the "server side of RAS" would work too. On BTTR, there is a thread about this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLVHXn79l8M "Let's Make a DOS BBS in a offensively modern way" 00:00 - Intro 00:15 - A Word from our sponsors 00:39 - What is a BBS 05:16 - How does a BBS work 13:15 - Lets get modern (containers) 23:51 - Kubernetes 26:56 - Build a server install Kubernetes 31:30 - Ceph, lets store some files 38:09 - Doors 42:38 - Lets make a helm chart 49:03 - Dial in and modems 53:17 - fTelnet 55:28 - Fidonet 58:13 - Thanks https://github.com/jgoerzen/docker-bbs-renegade Might fit with the topic discussed here, but on the other side, it might not answer the question which SLIP or PPP servers can be recommended and whether you connect them to real or rather simulated modems? I have not watched the video yet. Let me know :-) Regards, Eric ___________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation
Hi Jose, > Tomas said: > > network card =/= modem > > I never said nor implied they are the same. What you said is: "Anyway, you will still need a **modem driver** for DOS." (** added by me to emphasize) You continued with: "There used to be many of them in old software repositories as the Crynwr collection." This collection of **packet drivers** is still available at <http://crynwr.com/drivers/>. And packet drivers are typically for Ethernet network cards, not modems. Cheers, Robert -- BTTR Software https://www.bttr-software.de/ DOS ain't dead https://www.bttr-software.de/forum/ _______________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation?
Here is a neat summary of the DOS PPP drivers: http://www.oldskool.org/guides/tvdog/internet.html#I ...but, someone has already raised this question: Do you have a "counterpart"? I mean - a dial-in service answering with a modem and a PPP stack. Or at least a null-modem connection to a PPP "server", such as pppd running on Linux. Or possibly Windows running the "server side of RAS" would work too. You have mentioned that one of the PC emulators contains a "Hayes modem emulation". What is the use for that, exactly? What does it do? Suggestion: it answers to a few AT commands, including ATD, to which it responds with CONNECT, and puts you through onto a serial line - either a physical outside COM port, or e.g. an emulated virtual COM port in your host OS (where the emulator / VM is running). This might be useful to bamboozle some old DOS software, that insists on dialing out a modem (when accessing a serial line for whatever final purpose) - while in reality all you have is a null-modem cable, or a virtual equivalent thereof. The other option would be, that the "modem emulator" also provides the "server side PPP stack", effectively to set up a network connection, probably TCP/IP (although in principle, PPP can encapsulate other L3 protocols, such as Novell IPX/SPX or MS NetBEUI if I have all the ancient buzzwords right). Note that theoretically, at some sub-layers, PPP is really symmetrical, a conversation between equal parties. The client/server distinction stems from one party asking the other to authenticate, again using a modular mechanism supporting several protocols. For your practical purposes, these details are somewhat esoteric... Should you be interested, try reading RFC1661. If you don't insist on PPP / dial-up, and you really mean "I want to open Google in Arachne", just go down the "packet driver" route. You will save yourself quite a bit of hassle (configuring PPP). If OTOH it is the pain that you are after, go ahead with PPP client side and server side :-) and the follow-up networking stuff on the server part. Frank > > I'm not looking for anything out of Qmodem specifically. I'm > searching for a TSR that handles dial-up networking in the background > while I use TCP/IP utilities like PING, TRACERT and FTP; and/or a web > browser like Arachne. > > Brandon Taylor > > > From: Frantisek Rysanek > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 4:52 PM > To: Brandon Taylor via Freedos-user > > Cc: Brandon Taylor > Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation? > > Hello there Brandon, > > to me the key question is - what do you expect of Qmodem? > What would you like to achieve in / by using that program? > I've never used it, but I figure it would be a "terminal emulator" > with some added candy. An analog (predecessor, really) of Putty or > Hyperterminal in Windows. > > A terminal was originally a hardware device, having a screen and a > keyboard. I believe the rows of text on the screen were an evolution > / innovation after line printers. The text no longer rolled on paper, > now it rolled on a screen. The terminal needed to connect to > something, typically a relatively large computer (like an early UNIX > or mainframe machine), and the computer presented a command-line > interface to the user using that terminal. A single server could > cater for several terminals simultaneously, already back then. > > Later, when PC's and other computers became common-place, the > so-called "terminal emulator" programs allowed you to use your PC > (which is a pretty versatile computer) as a dumb terminal = to > display what arrived by an RS232 serial line, and to send your > keystrokes to the opposite party. You can actually connect two > terminals (or emulators) together over a cross-over RS232 line (also > called a Null Modem) and chat with each other... > > A modem is a device that originally allowed two parties to connect > over a phonecall, via the POTS/PSTN (telephone network). You first > needed to talk to your modem a little, to have it dial out the call. > If the call got picked up by an opposite modem, the two modems would > establish a "virtual serial line" spanning potentially hundreds of > kilometers. You could then chat or transfer files with a friend > (terminal emulators supported file transfer protocols such as X-modem > and Z-modem), or there were machines called "bulettin board systems", > nowadays I'd call them early servers, that you could dial into to > download or upload files, maybe do a bit of messaging... I don't > really have much of a clue what these could do, because this was > before I got my hands on a PC with a modem :-) Obviously you could > dial in remotely i
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation?
On 4/24/2024 11:33 PM, Brandon Taylor via Freedos-user wrote: I'm not looking for anything out of Qmodem specifically. I'm searching for a TSR that handles dial-up networking in the background while I use TCP/IP utilities like PING, TRACERT and FTP; and/or a web browser like Arachne. In that case, what you need is one of two things. either the crin packet drivers (already mentioned by Frank), which is probably the most useful option here, or something like rlfossil which pretends to be a fossil driver, that allows your programs to pretend to dial out to the internet even though none of that is necessary. Both have their advantages, depending on what you're doing, but it sounds like for you, the packet drivers are what you want/need. With those loaded, and configured properly, you should be able to run your other software as desired without worrying about the connection at all. The key words here are configured properly, because there are separate configuration items for software that uses a config file to read it's options (like some dos software does), and those that expect the connection to already be live when you open them. For what it's worth, there is actually a third option, you can run a program that contains multiple protocols built in already. there are programs that do this, but they were pretty nitch programs. There's also something like KA9Q which was a piece of software that could turn your dos box into an internet server, providing things like email, ftp, early web access (I believe they only support version 1.0 of the http protocol). but it doesn't sound like a server is what you're after. For your case, (as mentioned above), you'll most likely want to load the packet driver associated with your network card (most can pretend to be a ne2000 card, so just try that driver first, if it works, then you won't need to play around with anything else. Many 3com cards are also emulated these days, so if the ne2000 driver doesn't work, try the various 3com ones, one of those may do the trick for you. I can't recall the name of it now, but there was a package someone put together to allow you to use your packet driver to make the connection, then drop back to dos, with batch files to run the various programs, including ftp, email, and web browsing (using archne browser (apologies if I get any of the names wrong, it's been a while). If you want to go the fossil driver route, then you can use qmodem, but unless you're connecting to another machine (such as a shell account), this will be of extreme limited use/capabily. To use the rlfossil driver, you just type atdt and it will make a telnet connection to the hostname of choice (you can provide a port number as well). This was handy for playing muds back then, or for logging into a unix shell, but beyond that, it's use was pretty much useless, but it's there if you want to mess around with it. This is likely more information than you needed, but maybe something in here will trigger some wish to experiment or something. Basically, the packet drivers are what you want unless you want to do something specific that isn't covered by their use. I.E. running nettamer for irc chatting. Hope this helps, and good luck making it all work. I wish I still had a real dos machine operational, but I lost my last one in a forced move a bit over 2 years ago, so I can't actually try any of this stuff anymore sadly. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation?
I'm not looking for anything out of Qmodem specifically. I'm searching for a TSR that handles dial-up networking in the background while I use TCP/IP utilities like PING, TRACERT and FTP; and/or a web browser like Arachne. Brandon Taylor From: Frantisek Rysanek Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 4:52 PM To: Brandon Taylor via Freedos-user Cc: Brandon Taylor Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation? Hello there Brandon, to me the key question is - what do you expect of Qmodem? What would you like to achieve in / by using that program? I've never used it, but I figure it would be a "terminal emulator" with some added candy. An analog (predecessor, really) of Putty or Hyperterminal in Windows. A terminal was originally a hardware device, having a screen and a keyboard. I believe the rows of text on the screen were an evolution / innovation after line printers. The text no longer rolled on paper, now it rolled on a screen. The terminal needed to connect to something, typically a relatively large computer (like an early UNIX or mainframe machine), and the computer presented a command-line interface to the user using that terminal. A single server could cater for several terminals simultaneously, already back then. Later, when PC's and other computers became common-place, the so-called "terminal emulator" programs allowed you to use your PC (which is a pretty versatile computer) as a dumb terminal = to display what arrived by an RS232 serial line, and to send your keystrokes to the opposite party. You can actually connect two terminals (or emulators) together over a cross-over RS232 line (also called a Null Modem) and chat with each other... A modem is a device that originally allowed two parties to connect over a phonecall, via the POTS/PSTN (telephone network). You first needed to talk to your modem a little, to have it dial out the call. If the call got picked up by an opposite modem, the two modems would establish a "virtual serial line" spanning potentially hundreds of kilometers. You could then chat or transfer files with a friend (terminal emulators supported file transfer protocols such as X-modem and Z-modem), or there were machines called "bulettin board systems", nowadays I'd call them early servers, that you could dial into to download or upload files, maybe do a bit of messaging... I don't really have much of a clue what these could do, because this was before I got my hands on a PC with a modem :-) Obviously you could dial in remotely into a UNIX machine and work in its command line "shell" = work with files, read and send e-mail, use NNTP newsgroups and whatnot. All of the above was possible using a PC with a modem and a terminal emulator - I assume your Qmodem belongs to this category. I wouldn't call this usage style "the internet", except maybe in a very broad sense :-) RS232-style async serial lines, and their modem-based long-distance extensions, were also useful for other styles of traffic. As a side note, I'd mention UUCP, as a distributed worldwide e-mail system, predating TCP/IP-based SMTP (in practical popularity, if not by actual age). There were in fact several e-mail standards before SMTP, and UUCP was one of them. UUCP was an "open standard" - unlike other e-mail protocols/systems that were proprietary. RS232-style direct lines and modem connections can also be used to transport TCP/IP - in case this is what you mean by "internet". To "encapsulate" IP packets over an async serial line, you need an intermediate layer, called a "layer 2 protocol" (IP is layer 3). See also the layered ISO/OSI networking model (of which the Internet is not a verbatim implementation). So for serial links, there were two popular L2 protocols: SLIP and PPP. During that era, PPP pretty much took over - being generally more advanced / flexible / extensible... more suitable to the age of mammoth modem pools and dial-up internet access. To start PPP, you generally need two things: 1) a piece of software that talks to the modem, to make it dial a number, and wait for the modem to establish connection (the modem reports CONNECT and maybe some further info). You can do this by hand in a terminal emulator, or by a script, or by a dedicated unattended piece of software called a "dialer". 2) an implementation of PPP. After you dial the modem connection, you need a way to hand over the established modem session to a PPP "driver" (protocol talker). On top of PPP, you can then run a TCP/IP stack, which in turn gets used by "internet" applications such as e-mail clients, web browsers, FTP clients and whatnot (you can also run a server with a PPP connection to the internet). For instance, Windows since 95 have an ex-works "connection software" called "Microsoft Dial-Up Networking" (if memory serves) or RAS in the N
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation?
bove). As for Internet in DOS: Both MS-DOS and FreeDOS can connect to the internet. But, the first question is, what sort of "experience" you expect :-) Yes you could probably find some SMTP e-mail client. Yes there is an FTP client, a Telnet client... Yes there are even HTTP browsers - but, these were very basic! Think basic HTTP (hypertext). No JavaScript, hardly any graphics, text mode preferred. Web standards at the level of mid/late nineties. To get "internet" (TCP/IP support) in DOS, yes you need drivers. It is in fact a driver "stack", because the drivers are layered. Lower layer drivers are hardware-specific, upper-layer drivers implement HW-agnostic networking protocols. In DOS, drivers have the form of "resident" programs - aka TSR = Terminate and Stay Resident. DOS is a rudimentary mono-task OS. At face value, it cannot do multiple things at once. TSR's are one way to achieve such operation. A TSR looks like just any other program - except, upon its return to the command prompt, it hasn't really unloaded itself from the memory. A piece of its executable code has remained in RAM, with official approval of the OS, and has probably hooked a hardware IRQ (e.g. from a network card) or a so-called "software interrupt vector" = really a service callgate. Thus, it can be invoked in the background, do a bit of work, and return control to your interactive foreground application. There were actually several TCP/IP stacks (libraries) for DOS, from different vendors. A key concept, around which those TCP/IP stacks revolve, is a "network driver interface" (API). There is the Microsoft family of NDIS2 drivers. Novell had its own family of ODI drivers. Then there is the "Crynwr Packet Driver" interface - very popular in MS-DOS TCP/IP software made by anyone except Microsoft :-) In general, if you have a particular application program that you'd like to use for internet access in DOS, this program probably contains a particular TCP/IP stack (either linked in, or as an external protocol driver) and therefore dictates the interface that you need to make available in your DOS setup = what set of drivers you need to load. For the most popular brands and models of Network Interface Cards (Ethernet), the vendors still make DOS drivers available. For some cards, you can get a hardware-specific "crynwr packet driver". Alternatively, you will also find HW-specific NDIS or ODI drivers. Note that if you need a "packet driver", but all you can find is an NDIS or ODI driver, do not despair - there are generic ndispkt and odipkt "shims" to provide a Crynwr interface on top of an NDIS or ODI hw-specific driver. I recall that there were also at least two implementations of a PPP packet driver for DOS. One of them was a nice but proprietary package called Klos-PPP. I don't recall the name of the other free PPP stack. Those two stacks both could dial out via a Hayes modem, I seem to recall a chat-script, and once the modem connected, start PPP and serve the Crynwr interface on top. Do you need modem and PPP for internet access from DOS? Definitely not! If you're speaking emulators, just check what legacy NIC the emulator emulates. You will likely find one of Intel gigabit, Intel 100Mb, Realtek RTL8139, NE2000 or some such. So you enable the NIC in your emulator, and then you just need to find the old DOS driver for that NIC. You also need some know how, about how the driver stack fits together. I'd say that the PPP stack with a dialer would take more conventional RAM (it's a TSR, see) compared to an Ethernet NIC driver. No need to mess with PPP, unless of course you enjoy the nostalgic value. If you're interested to find out e.g. what web browsers could run on top of a Crynwr packet driver, I recall that there were DOS builds of Lynx and Links, and a graphical browser caller Arachne. I also recommend you to check Michael Brutman's mTCP utility pack, as well as his homepage - it has many explanations and links to further reading, on the broad topic of DOS networking and the (Crynwr) packet driver interface. http://www.brutman.com/ The website and software keep receiving updates! If this is overwhelming, well there you have it :-) On my part, questions to the point are always welcome. You have my sympathy for being curious. Frank > > Indeed, I'm using an old-school program called Qmodem. My question > now is – would I be able to use the Internet using the emulated > modem? > > Brandon Taylor > > > From:Jim Hall via Freedos-user > Sent:Tuesday, April 23, 2024 10:12 PM > To:Discussion and general questions about FreeDOS. > > Cc:Jim Hall > Subject:Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation? > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024, 9:38 PM Brandon Taylor via Freedos-user > wrote: > Since FreeDOS doesn't support ph
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-up emulation
Tomas said: > network card =/= modem I never said nor implied they are the same. I said that, if an user has a machine with a network card, and a suitable DOS driver for the card is available, he/she may use it, instead of setting a dial-up connection. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Dial-uo emulation ?
On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 21:59:00 +0200, Jose Senna via Freedos-user wrote: > Anyway, you will still need a modem driver for DOS. There used to be > many of them in old software repositories as the Crynwr collection. Network card =/= modem. /Tomas ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
