Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
I was thinking something along these lines. There could be a "Classic" install option which installs only the same components offered by MS-DOS, and a "Modern" option which has the same content, but with significant components swapped out for their more modern alternatives - e.g. a newer text editor instead of a basic EDIT clone, etc. On a subsequent screen, there could be an option for installing additional packages as part of the process, which would house the myriad of other components available. Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email. ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐ On Saturday, December 5, 2020 12:51 AM, TK Chia u1049321...@caramail.com wrote: > Hello Jerome, > >> Some random additional thoughts, >> I guess some times there was a little confusion with the 1.2 release over a >> FULL install. > > Maybe a good way would be to call a "FULL minus EXTRA" install by a less > confusing name? E.g. perhaps call it a "RICH" install or something > along those lines. > Thank you! > --- > > https://github.com/tkchia > 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] Make sure your opinion is heard
Hello Jerome, Some random additional thoughts, I guess some times there was a little confusion with the 1.2 release over a FULL install. Maybe a good way would be to call a "FULL minus EXTRA" install by a less confusing name? E.g. perhaps call it a "RICH" install or something along those lines. Thank you! -- https://github.com/tkchia ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
That subject line is just asking for a lot of traffic! I am a DOS user in current operations (wordstar, Foxpro, others). My thought about asking for a survey,etc. is that it should come from the "mgmt" of the FreeDOS organizaton. That way those of us that are not involved in the decisions of how FreeDOS will go forward, will know its "official". Comment oh what I think everyone is talking about: Have 2 packages. One is the OS and its immediate utilities. The other is various DOS programs that might perpetuate the use of DOS and make it better to use. We could have discussions of which files should be on which package. Set soapbox off, John Sowden On 12/4/20 8:09 AM, Jerome Shidel wrote: Are you happy with what software is included with FreeDOS? Are there packages you feel don't always need installed? Make sure your voice is heard. Visit the Package Survey https://fd.lod.bz/survey Even if you don’t want any changes or to leave a comment, you can just scroll to the bottom and hit submit. Thanks again, 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] Make sure your opinion is heard
This is such an interesting discussion. Granted my quick check of the survey was a bit of a mess. still I have a question / comment as someone who uses DOS exclusively, but who has not installed freedos on a machine due to a couple of factors. I resonate with the freedos is open source concept. still, speaking personally I feel one wants a version of the install that lets you run Freedos, and incorporate the other DOS programs you desire, with some baseline aspects too. So, why can there not be two editions of the install? One with absolutely everything so that developers can still be innovative. And, one that gives an end user what they desire, networking that works, the foundations for troubleshooting issues, drivers for setting things up, video, audio, modem and wireless / wired internet. as many browsers that will work, and if included more than one editor. The networking aspect is a critical, so that one can add more if needed. besides improving sshdos so that new dh keys work is a win for Freedos generally. Since someone referenced wordstar, I am a wordperfect person, does that mean Wordstar exists for open source use? Just my thoughts, Karen On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, Jerome Shidel wrote: Hi, Some random additional thoughts, I guess some times there was a little confusion with the 1.2 release over a FULL install. Some thought it installed absolutely everything on the disc. But, that was not the case. There was over 400mb of packages not included by FULL. Those were the EXTRA packages. Many people probably never even though to look at those EXTRAs. So with 1.3-RC3, we made FULL install pretty much everything on the CD. This resulted in a lengthy install, cluttered root and much un-needed cruft. While we will work on fixing all of that root directory clutter, I don’t think 500-600 mb FULL install is the answer. In my opinion, Slimming FULL back to 100mb maximum No (or very limited) EXTRAS on the install CD Maybe everything else on a separate BONUS (or maybe eventually a Bonus Dev, GUI, Utils) disc. :-) 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] Make sure your opinion is heard
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 09:36:29PM +0100, Eric Auer wrote: > > Yes, but for starters the "modest" programming languages could be included: > > GW BASIC, 2-3 Forth compilers (they're tiny in size), C--, XPL0 etc. If I'm > > Nobody programs useful stuff with GW BASIC, C-- or XPL0. I meant LEARNING first of all. No need for Watcom line of "full blown" compilers for learning purposes. > Even with Forth, useful stuff is not written on DOS. So it's time to change it, isn't it? How it can be changed without even that few KB spent for humble Forth compiler? > If you want modest, try Ruxulo's tiny, working OpenWatcom C subset :-) I somehow don't believe it can be as modest as DX Forth or C--, for example. And no, I also don't believe when there will be Watcom C on CD the users immediately start coding "useful stuff for DOS". ;) When the need arises for such "big" compiler they surely will find it on ibiblio. > > correct also the ones "released" by Embarcadero (while not open-sourced) > > Turbo Pascal 3.02 and Turbo C 2.01 also could be included. > > Those could not legally be included and obviously FreeDOS should > show off the nice existing open source alternatives if you ask me. But Embarcadero can be contacted whether they allow it or not. They may even send back a written permit. Nice existing open source alternatives quite frequently have not-so-nice size; compare, for example, the size of mentioned Turbo Pascal 3.02 (less than one diskette 360 KB!) to size of Free Pascal. Or A86 to NASM. Yes, I'm aware Free Pascal and NASM offer "a bit more" - the question is: does someone who just wants to learn Pascal (or ML) need that "bit more" already at the very start? IMHO it may even bring confusion. > > I mean the ones that have modest space requirements, while at the same time > > offer immediate results for beginner programmer (and just fun). > > Which is why I have often voted small but nice things into FULL > and a few things even into BASE in the current poll, instead of > leaving those in EXTRA or ONLINE. Because it allows to show the > variety and maybe even fun which are possible in DOS to those > who "only" have downloaded the FULL CD which I think would be > a good compromise between size and features. Of course a 10 MB > FreeDOS would still outperform MS DOS 6.22 in various fields, > but it would be less fun and honestly, who worries about 10 MB > in times when people send 10 MB photos of their dinner by chat? > > > - let's consider what "average DOS user" may need... > > That is EXACTLY why the poll / survey is waiting for you :-) > There you can make a detailed selection and recommendation. > > ==> https://fd.lod.bz/survey :-) Of course I'll visit it. > > - when in a need for more - everything FreeDOS-related can be downloaded > > Not really, as many DOS users lack network connectivity even > if we include all available WIRED LAN drivers as part of BASE. So they may download it using their Android tablets and move to DOS using memory cards (that can be read as HDDs). > > - additionally DVD iso-images can be created that will contain all > > That would be a waste of bandwidth for those who do not need ALL. Actually it may be seen as this - but it's rather common nowadays (see Linux and xBSDs practice etc.). OK, it were just my 2c -- regards, Zbigniew ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
Hi, Some random additional thoughts, I guess some times there was a little confusion with the 1.2 release over a FULL install. Some thought it installed absolutely everything on the disc. But, that was not the case. There was over 400mb of packages not included by FULL. Those were the EXTRA packages. Many people probably never even though to look at those EXTRAs. So with 1.3-RC3, we made FULL install pretty much everything on the CD. This resulted in a lengthy install, cluttered root and much un-needed cruft. While we will work on fixing all of that root directory clutter, I don’t think 500-600 mb FULL install is the answer. In my opinion, Slimming FULL back to 100mb maximum No (or very limited) EXTRAS on the install CD Maybe everything else on a separate BONUS (or maybe eventually a Bonus Dev, GUI, Utils) disc. :-) Jerome ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
Hi ZB, > Yes, but for starters the "modest" programming languages could be included: > GW BASIC, 2-3 Forth compilers (they're tiny in size), C--, XPL0 etc. If I'm Nobody programs useful stuff with GW BASIC, C-- or XPL0. Even with Forth, useful stuff is not written on DOS. If you want modest, try Ruxulo's tiny, working OpenWatcom C subset :-) > correct also the ones "released" by Embarcadero (while not open-sourced) > Turbo Pascal 3.02 and Turbo C 2.01 also could be included. Those could not legally be included and obviously FreeDOS should show off the nice existing open source alternatives if you ask me. > I mean the ones that have modest space requirements, while at the same time > offer immediate results for beginner programmer (and just fun). Which is why I have often voted small but nice things into FULL and a few things even into BASE in the current poll, instead of leaving those in EXTRA or ONLINE. Because it allows to show the variety and maybe even fun which are possible in DOS to those who "only" have downloaded the FULL CD which I think would be a good compromise between size and features. Of course a 10 MB FreeDOS would still outperform MS DOS 6.22 in various fields, but it would be less fun and honestly, who worries about 10 MB in times when people send 10 MB photos of their dinner by chat? > - let's consider what "average DOS user" may need... That is EXACTLY why the poll / survey is waiting for you :-) There you can make a detailed selection and recommendation. ==> https://fd.lod.bz/survey :-) > - when in a need for more - everything FreeDOS-related can be downloaded Not really, as many DOS users lack network connectivity even if we include all available WIRED LAN drivers as part of BASE. > - additionally DVD iso-images can be created that will contain all That would be a waste of bandwidth for those who do not need ALL. SUGGESTION: Make tools for Windows, Linux and Mac, or even better, make a javascript based 1-size-fits-all WEBSITE / download service. Where people can use a menu to mass-download a selection of packages as one big zip, 7zip or tarball, similar in look and feel to the FreeDOS online package managers, but for those who have no network for their DOS. They can then download that one big zip, copy it to their DOS computer, unzip it and use the offline package managers to get all those packages installed. Without wasting bandwidth and with the convenience of seeing which download offers what and the convenicence of only having to transfer ONE file to DOS :-) Note that Vetusware abandonware is not necessarily legal at all. Cheers, Eric ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
Hi Tom, > On Dec 4, 2020, at 1:08 PM, tom ehlert wrote: > >> Are you happy with what software is included with FreeDOS? > > you are mixing up "FreeDOS" with "FreeDOS setup 1.x” > […] > insofar your attempt to discuss what should be "FreeDOS" is welcome. > it just comes a little bit late. I don’t think I am confused. And, I am not trying to define or change what is meant when people think about FreeDOS. What is or is not FreeDOS is not the point of the Survey. The main purpose is to help us (all of us) make decisions on what software will be provided along with FreeDOS for user convenience. What gets installed when selecting BASE or FULL. Also, what packages are up and running when a user boots the LiveCD. The packages that can be provided continue to grow. Do users want a 4-DVD iso set called “FreeDOS 1.x”? I really doubt that. Do users want a Floppy diskette image with just the kernel and shell? Maybe even less likely. The question becomes, what do “you” as a user want to see on a FreeDOS release? So, that is why it is a "FreeDOS Release Media Package Survey”. This is a never ending question and the answer will most likely change over time. This is why the survey pulls package lists and information from the official repo server and settings files for the installer. As things come and go or move from here to there, the Survey will change as well. Future Releases can benefit from doing the Survey again at a later date. > all that said: have a live CD and default setup for BASE and 7ZIP (zip > and unzip don't handle newer ZIP archive methods). Do you mean just BASE + 7ZIP? No other utilities or programs? If a user wants to use rawrite (or something else), they can extract it themselves? > have a decent description what all these other "packages" might do. FDIMPLES works ok for browsing packages. It could be better and the descriptions for many packages could use improved. But for now, it’s what we have. > have more then 1 packet driver available to install those "packages". > (used to be called "Programs”) Do you mean provide networkings support to install additional packages? And provide more packet drivers for a greater range of supported hardware? There really is not any difference. Like “Application” or “Program”. However, I personally think of the zip archive files on the media as packages. They have special folder structures in them that install programs like FDNPKG use to remap directories to the file system. If you simply extract those archives, you may loose the intended directory layout for the program and it may not work without some moving of files around. For example, \PROGS\* usually gets mapped to C:\. And there are others. > > Tom > Jerome ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 08:59:03PM +0100, Eric Auer wrote: > > Maybe, but 90% of FreeDOS users don't need programming languages > > Well it is open source, so it is good to show users > what coding can mean ;-) Yes, but for starters the "modest" programming languages could be included: GW BASIC, 2-3 Forth compilers (they're tiny in size), C--, XPL0 etc. If I'm correct also the ones "released" by Embarcadero (while not open-sourced) Turbo Pascal 3.02 and Turbo C 2.01 also could be included. I mean the ones that have modest space requirements, while at the same time offer immediate results for beginner programmer (and just fun). And simply useful - they were used to create DOS applications, anyway. > A separate source code CD would be a nice idea indeed. My proposal is simple: - let's consider what "average DOS user" may need - surely not source code, neither Emacs nor Watcom C compiler - and let's pack "full featured" 650 MB CD. It still has menu that allows package selection, right? In the future, in case anything should be added there, then only at a "cost" of removing something first - when in a need for more - everything FreeDOS-related can be downloaded (maybe that online-installation tool by Mateusz Viste can be additional solution, if it's in "production ready" state) - additionally DVD iso-images can be created that will contain all these downloadable packages, to allow "offline installation", not relying on Internet Simple and straightforward, no "intermediate variants" -- regards, Zbigniew ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
Hi! > Maybe, but 90% of FreeDOS users don't need programming languages Well it is open source, so it is good to show users what coding can mean ;-) But what you mean is the BASE install: Indeed that should be similar in size to old MS DOS distros, only a few megabytes, just the features of DOS itself, plus some new drivers. >> Now you already are at 200 MB... You misunderstand my point: I suggest to NOT add 200 or even 400 MB or 3 GB to the installation CD. Maybe 50 MB for the basics, because they easily fit on one CD together with all the other FULL install stuff. But even FULL install should not be more than that. Those who want up to 3 GB of DJGPP stuff can still install that from the DJGPP website later. That means having good network drivers would be nice. So people can download more stuff without having to leave DOS. A separate source code CD would be a nice idea indeed. Cheers, Eric ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 08:26:46PM +0100, Eric Auer wrote: > > "FreeDOS installation has to fit standard 650 MB CD" > > Even then I disagree. While you could fill entire DVD with > stuff for DOS, a FreeDOS CD could be a lot smaller That's why I meant 650 MB CD, not 4 GB DVD. > Just the 3 most common programming languages and RHIDE would > already be 72 MB (34 GCC, 15 G++, 6 RHIDE, 6 GAS, 4 GDB etc.). Maybe, but 90% of FreeDOS users don't need programming languages - and especially that "fat ones". Maybe GW BASIC etc. for "sentimental reasons". > Add EMACS with everything: 54 MB. Objective C: 22 MB. > GRX: 2 MB Allegro: Up to 19 MB Extra doc formats: 20 MB > Now you already are at 200 MB... Why are you willing to add on installation CD exactly these most space-demanding applications? How many FreeDOS users need exactly Emacs or Objective C? > Add the source code for everything: Voila, 423 MB purely > for DJGPP just some of their 3 GB kitchen sink of data: 90% (or more) of FreeDOS users don't need that source code. It should be placed on additional "source code CD", or available just for download -- regards, Zbigniew ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
Freedos is open source. Everyone has the privilege of creating as many forks as desired. It ain't a big deal. Al On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:09 PM tom ehlert wrote: > > Are you happy with what software is included with FreeDOS? > > you are mixing up "FreeDOS" with "FreeDOS setup 1.x" > > there was a lot of FreeDOS going on before this (IMO insane) > FreeDOS 1.0 release. > > xyzDOS used to be mostly equivalent to be our "BASE" with few > additions. > > at some point, someone decided to declare "FreeDOS" to be equivalent > to "every software that runs on FreeDOS and has GPL licensing". > without even asking. > > at first sight plausible. Unfortunately that means to throw 25 editors, 20 > assemblers, and the decision to use DOSLFN or LFNDOS at the users. > hint: one of both is more or less supported and bugfree, the other > not. guess which one :-< > > luckily for "FreeDOS", developement has stalled. > otherwise "FreeDOS" would be PetaBytes to download. > > insofar your attempt to discuss what should be "FreeDOS" is welcome. > it just comes a little bit late. > > all that said: have a live CD and default setup for BASE and 7ZIP (zip > and unzip don't handle newer ZIP archive methods). > > have a decent description what all these other "packages" might do. > > have more then 1 packet driver available to install those "packages". > (used to be called "Programs") > > 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] Make sure your opinion is heard
On 12/4/2020 10:42 AM, ZB wrote: Why petabytes? I believe there could be "sane boundary" established; for example: "FreeDOS installation has to fit standard 650 MB CD". This sounds rather insane to me, considering that MS-DOS/PC-DOS fit on 3 or 4 floppy disks. Just saying. There have been for more than a decade two different trends when it come to FreeDOS, both of which I think are neither healthy nor sustainable. For one, it seems that some people feel the need to include everything and the kitchen sink as part of FreeDOS. Even if there is only the slightest shadow of usefulness for DOS. And the other is that people stopped collaborating on a given program/tool. And instead we have now a more or less large plethora of tools that all do the same thing. And I am not necessarily talking about different editors, which can have different use cases to begin with... Ralf -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
Hi! > "FreeDOS installation has to fit standard 650 MB CD" Even then I disagree. While you could fill entire DVD with stuff for DOS, a FreeDOS CD could be a lot smaller if you omit a few, but huge packages. For example DJGPP can be a reasonable number of megabytes, but you can also fill the whole FreeDOS CD just with everything you find over there at delorie: http://delorie.com/djgpp/zip-picker.html Just the 3 most common programming languages and RHIDE would already be 72 MB (34 GCC, 15 G++, 6 RHIDE, 6 GAS, 4 GDB etc.). Add EMACS with everything: 54 MB. Objective C: 22 MB. GRX: 2 MB Allegro: Up to 19 MB Extra doc formats: 20 MB Now you already are at 200 MB... Add the source code for everything: Voila, 423 MB purely for DJGPP just some of their 3 GB kitchen sink of data: http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/mirroring.html As opposed to just C (no C++, no IDE) plus their own Pakke package manager to install the rest: 52 MB, while people can still move to a more full installation later. And I am sure you can make a MUCH lighter version if you take the effort to so some manual selection of subsets. Now DJGPP is a thing which I would enjoy in the distro, but think for example about https://harbour.github.io/ the classic Clipper clone. Who is actually programming in that language using FreeDOS? Not including it on ISO will save 5 to 11 MB, we can still provide it ONLINE as packages for separate download. Cheers, Eric ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 07:08:03PM +0100, tom ehlert wrote: > luckily for "FreeDOS", developement has stalled. > otherwise "FreeDOS" would be PetaBytes to download. Why petabytes? I believe there could be "sane boundary" established; for example: "FreeDOS installation has to fit standard 650 MB CD". I think such CD can comprise enough of DOS software tu suit everyone's taste. The rest can be available for download. So if willing to add another editor (or anything) to the contents of installation CD - consider which part of the set will be removed -- regards, Zbigniew ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Make sure your opinion is heard
> Are you happy with what software is included with FreeDOS? you are mixing up "FreeDOS" with "FreeDOS setup 1.x" there was a lot of FreeDOS going on before this (IMO insane) FreeDOS 1.0 release. xyzDOS used to be mostly equivalent to be our "BASE" with few additions. at some point, someone decided to declare "FreeDOS" to be equivalent to "every software that runs on FreeDOS and has GPL licensing". without even asking. at first sight plausible. Unfortunately that means to throw 25 editors, 20 assemblers, and the decision to use DOSLFN or LFNDOS at the users. hint: one of both is more or less supported and bugfree, the other not. guess which one :-< luckily for "FreeDOS", developement has stalled. otherwise "FreeDOS" would be PetaBytes to download. insofar your attempt to discuss what should be "FreeDOS" is welcome. it just comes a little bit late. all that said: have a live CD and default setup for BASE and 7ZIP (zip and unzip don't handle newer ZIP archive methods). have a decent description what all these other "packages" might do. have more then 1 packet driver available to install those "packages". (used to be called "Programs") Tom ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Not sure is it possible - but maybe I'm missing something?
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 03:33:29PM +, Bret Johnson wrote: > FWIW, I prefer NASM myself also. I started out using A86/A386 a long > time ago (before NASM and FASM even existed in a useful form) but my > source code eventually got too big for A86 to handle. A86 doesn't take > advantage of extended or expanded memory or protected mode so it can't > handle large or complicated source files, plus it's not free. [..] Thanks. Learning how to use these tools themselves will take some fair share of my time, that's why I'm curious to know opinion of more experienced ones. > Also FWIW, I still prefer the D86/D386 Debugger (though even it has its > quirks). The Debugger is at least as, if not more, important as > the Assembler itself. I read very good opinions about Watcom's debugger (WD) - from Open Watcom package - but not yet tried it by myself -- regards, Zbigniew ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Not sure is it possible - but maybe I'm missing som ething?
FWIW, I prefer NASM myself also. I started out using A86/A386 a long time ago (before NASM and FASM even existed in a useful form) but my source code eventually got too big for A86 to handle. A86 doesn't take advantage of extended or expanded memory or protected mode so it can't handle large or complicated source files, plus it's not free. When I started looking for a new Assembler, I compared FASM and NASM and a few others and chose NASM since it appeared to be the most appropriate for what I do in DOS. All Assemblers are a little different and all have their quirks and different things I like and don't like about them. I REALLY don't like MASM or its clones at all. Since then, I've converted a few of my older programs from A86 to NASM. I started with a "simple" program to see how hard it was to do the conversion, and it is quite difficult. As a result, I don't convert an existing program from A86 to NASM until and unless I have to. All of my new programs I do in NASM. Also FWIW, I still prefer the D86/D386 Debugger (though even it has its quirks). The Debugger is at least as, if not more, important as the Assembler itself. Bret -- Original Message -- From: "C. Masloch" To: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Not sure is it possible - but maybe I'm missing something? Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 11:45:06 +0200 On 2019-05-09 18:02 +0200, ZB wrote: > BTW: which macroassembler you prefer? I prefer NASM. The reason I initially forked lDebug was actually to keep its source in the NASM dialect. Also, I adjusted the (default) disassembly display to mostly match NASM's syntax. Regards, ecm Chemical Linked to Popcorn Destroys Brain Health clearstateofmind.com http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5cd59a0e506541a0e7be6st04vuc ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Not sure is it possible - but maybe I'm missing something?
On 2019-05-09 18:02 +0200, ZB wrote: > BTW: which macroassembler you prefer? I prefer NASM. The reason I initially forked lDebug was actually to keep its source in the NASM dialect. Also, I adjusted the (default) disassembly display to mostly match NASM's syntax. Regards, ecm ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Not sure is it possible - but maybe I'm missing something?
On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 04:53:26PM +0200, C. Masloch wrote: > I needed something similar in my lDebug symbolic anyway, so I created a > quick patch to add a Y command in my fork of FreeDOS's DEBUG. You give > it a filename (LFN or SFN, use double quote marks if to escape blanks) > and it pushes the file onto an internal stack. The script file should > not include a Q command (since that quits the debugger entirely as it is). > > I uploaded a build at https://ulukai.org/ecm/ldebug-64117aa565dd.zip -- > The repo is available at > https://bitbucket.org/ecm/ldebug/src/64117aa565dde7183edcbd87f1a8c4896f71814a Thanks a lot. :) BTW: which macroassembler you prefer? -- regards, Zbigniew ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Not sure is it possible - but maybe I'm missing something?
Hello,
On at 2019-05-05 18:16 +0200, ZB wrote:
> For testing small snippets of ML code "debug" is quite enough. But the
> disadvantage is that when I try to script it ("debug using files like this example:
>
> a 100
> mov ax,10
> [...some other ML code...]
> [...some other ML code...]
> [...some other ML code...]
> [empty line]
> [...more "debug" commands...]
>
> ..it works just fine but it always returns to DOS prompt (I believe it
> always happen when it detects end of "script" file). Yes, I can save the
> snippet as binary this way before it leaves debug, but maybe there's a way
> to stay in debug's "shell"?
I needed something similar in my lDebug symbolic anyway, so I created a
quick patch to add a Y command in my fork of FreeDOS's DEBUG. You give
it a filename (LFN or SFN, use double quote marks if to escape blanks)
and it pushes the file onto an internal stack. The script file should
not include a Q command (since that quits the debugger entirely as it is).
I uploaded a build at https://ulukai.org/ecm/ldebug-64117aa565dd.zip --
The repo is available at
https://bitbucket.org/ecm/ldebug/src/64117aa565dde7183edcbd87f1a8c4896f71814a
Regards,
ecm
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] ? - ?Not sure? - ?
Hi, On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Ralf A. Quint free...@gmx.net wrote: At 11:16 PM 7/14/2012, Rugxulo wrote: On Jul 15, 2012 12:56 AM, Ralf A. Quint mailto:free...@gmx.netfree...@gmx.net wrote: See above. It would be really helpful for you if you hit the books about BASIC (almost any one will do) to understand the differences between the different data types and how to use them. Or he could use a language like Rexx (see Regina), where everything is a string. It has its own built-in debugger too. That doesn't help one bit (pun intended) with neither actually learning the very basics of programming nor the problem of not using quotes around the string constants. That would also be the very same issue in Rexx. Or pretty much any other programming language for that matter... Rexx should be a drop easier. Here's what I was thinking: #!/usr/local/bin/rexx signal on novalue trace ?a a=5 b=6 say a+b /* 11 */ blah: say a+c /* Bad arithmetic conversion */ say bye /* BYE */ exit novalue: say c /* C */ ; c=10 say oops /* OOPS */ signal blah -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] ? - ?Not sure? - ?
Hi, On Jul 15, 2012 12:56 AM, Ralf A. Quint free...@gmx.net wrote: See above. It would be really helpful for you if you hit the books about BASIC (almost any one will do) to understand the differences between the different data types and how to use them. Or he could use a language like Rexx (see Regina), where everything is a string. It has its own built-in debugger too. -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] ? - ?Not sure? - ?
At 11:16 PM 7/14/2012, Rugxulo wrote: On Jul 15, 2012 12:56 AM, Ralf A. Quint mailto:free...@gmx.netfree...@gmx.net wrote: See above. It would be really helpful for you if you hit the books about BASIC (almost any one will do) to understand the differences between the different data types and how to use them. Or he could use a language like Rexx (see Regina), where everything is a string. It has its own built-in debugger too. That doesn't help one bit (pun intended) with neither actually learning the very basics of programming nor the problem of not using quotes around the string constants. That would also be the very same issue in Rexx. Or pretty much any other programming language for that matter... Ralf -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] ? - ?Not sure? - ?
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Kenny Emond cheeseylem...@gmail.com wrote: dim ft as single, m as single, answer1 as single, answer2 as single, input1 as string, a as string, b as string Might the mixture of singles and strings in your dim statement be the issue? You are defining your results as numbers, but your inputs as strings. Unless there is an implicit typecast done by FB, you are attempting to perform arithmetic on input values you have defined as strings, not numbers. Since you can only perform arithmetic on numbers, I'd expect that to fail. __ Dennis https://plus.google.com/u/0/105128793974319004519 -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] ? - ?Not sure? - ?
if there's no mistake, input is for numbers, and inkey$ or inkey was for alphanumerics... you'll need to check the book to see what's the input acceptor for alphabetic input... eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com eufdp...@yahoo.com From: dmccunney dennis.mccun...@gmail.com To: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 11:33 PM Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] ? - ?Not sure? - ? On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Kenny Emond cheeseylem...@gmail.com wrote: dim ft as single, m as single, answer1 as single, answer2 as single, input1 as string, a as string, b as string Might the mixture of singles and strings in your dim statement be the issue? You are defining your results as numbers, but your inputs as strings. Unless there is an implicit typecast done by FB, you are attempting to perform arithmetic on input values you have defined as strings, not numbers. Since you can only perform arithmetic on numbers, I'd expect that to fail. __ Dennis https://plus.google.com/u/0/105128793974319004519 -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] ? - ?Not sure? - ?
At 08:22 PM 7/14/2012, Kenny Emond wrote: Hey, I'm not sure if I can post this here, but I seem to have hit a small roadblock (but I don't know where it is). My main goal is to have an easily accessible meter and feet converter. When I use FBide to compile and run, it comes up with no errors. But when it runs, I put in a or b and then it just quits (of course, after I press enter). Could anyone help me out? Here's what my file looks like: Well, not a FreeDOS problem at all, but basic (mis)understanding of programming (not to mention that the math is simply wrong) dim ft as single, m as single, answer1 as single, answer2 as single, input1 as string, a as string, b as string input Convert (A) Feet to meters, or (B) Meters to feet? [NOTE- Use lower case!] , input1 cls if input1 = a Then That's where soft matter hits a fast rotating object: You input a string but compare the input against an uninitialized variable called a. The proper comparison would be 'if input1 = a then', as string constants have to be enclosed in double quotes input Feet amount: , ft answer1 = ft * 3.2808399 Don't know where you got that number from but a foot in the commonly accepted Fred Flintstone units is 0.3048m (1 foot = 12 inches of 25.4mm each, that's 304.8mm = 0.3048m) cls print ; ft; feet is equal to ; answer1; meters. sleep elseif input1 = b then Same as above, to compare strings, you need to enclose the string constant in double quotes, so it needs to be 'elseif input1 = b then', or else you again compare against an uninitialized variable named b input Meter amount: , m answer2 = m / 3.2808399 Again wrong math, in order to get from meters you need to divide by 0.3048 (or multiply by 3.28084) cls print ; m; meters is equal to ; answer2; feet. sleep end if sleep end Any ideas? See above. It would be really helpful for you if you hit the books about BASIC (almost any one will do) to understand the differences between the different data types and how to use them. Ralf -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
