Hi!
FreeDOS has been using info-zip as the ZIP and UNZIP tool
ever since I can remember. And it works very nicely, so
I do not miss PKZIP either. If somebody really does miss
it, a wrapper to translate PKZIP OPTIONX into a call to
ZIP OPTIONY might be an idea, but as said, I do not think
anybody
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Mateusz Viste wrote:
> On Friday 03 April 2009 16:56, Alain M. wrote:
>> UNARJ.EXE may be freely used and distributed.
>
> Doesn't matter anyway - I just checked my repository, and there is only the
> OpenSource version of ARJ, so no license problem there :)
>
Co
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Alain M. wrote:
>
> King InuYasha escreveu:
> > I believe Info-ZIP has a suitable replacement for PKware's DOS pkzip and
> > pkunzip (ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/msdos/).
>
> Yes, it is compatible, just has a different command line (more unix
> like). I mad
Is fdupdate compiled with SSE or MMX or any other special instruction sets
that are unavailable in 486? If so, just recompile with those disabled.
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Michael Robinson
wrote:
> I'm still stumped as to why fdupdate works on my Pentium 4,
> but it doesn't work on my 486.
On Friday 03 April 2009 16:56, Alain M. wrote:
> UNARJ.EXE may be freely used and distributed.
Doesn't matter anyway - I just checked my repository, and there is only the
OpenSource version of ARJ, so no license problem there :)
Regards,
Mateusz
--
You'll find my public OpenPGP key at http://ww
King InuYasha escreveu:
> I believe Info-ZIP has a suitable replacement for PKware's DOS pkzip and
> pkunzip (ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/msdos/).
Yes, it is compatible, just has a different command line (more unix
like). I made the switch many years ago :)
Definnetly ZIP and UNZIP shou
Mateusz Viste escreveu:
>
> As for ARJ (I am not talking about the OpenSource one, which is another
> program), it is freeware. May be downloaded without restrictions from ARJ's
> website, as far as we use it for a home usage.
> http://www.arjsoftware.com/files.htm
No, it is not freeware, jus
I believe Info-ZIP has a suitable replacement for PKware's DOS pkzip and
pkunzip (ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/msdos/).
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Mateusz Viste wrote:
> On Friday 03 April 2009 06:12, Blair Campbell wrote:
> > arj is open-source (http://arj.sourceforge.net/) and pkzip
On Friday 03 April 2009 06:12, Blair Campbell wrote:
> arj is open-source (http://arj.sourceforge.net/) and pkzip afaik can
> be redistributed (but not the source).
Hi!
I think Alain is right. I didn't bothered checking before (I naively assumed
that such old tools would be at least freeware by
> There is a problem here: There are 2 pirates programs there: pkzip and
> arj. Can this be removed
arj is open-source (http://arj.sourceforge.net/) and pkzip afaik can
be redistributed (but not the source).
--
__
Geraldo Netto escreveu:
> "certified"(okay) packages are at
> http://www.viste-family.net/mateusz/fdupdate/
There is a problem here: There are 2 pirates programs there: pkzip and
arj. Can this be removed
Alain
--
Guys,
Packages are been verified by Mateusz
please, check and help him
i've send him 123 packages that i've done by myself
the list goes from common stuff to perl and lua
"certified"(okay) packages are at
http://www.viste-family.net/mateusz/fdupdate/
and work in progress packages are at
http://w
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Jim Hall wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Michael Robinson
> wrote:
> > What is the status of Freedos 1.1? It has been a while since the you
> > can help link has been updated.
> >
>
> I believe the core issues haven't changed:
>
> 1. The new FDUPDATE i
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Michael Robinson
wrote:
> What is the status of Freedos 1.1? It has been a while since the you
> can help link has been updated.
>
I believe the core issues haven't changed:
1. The new FDUPDATE is done.
2. The FreeDOS "1.1" packages haven't been updated yet.
3.
Hello,
2008/8/29, Travis Siegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Speaking of freedos 1.1.
> I know freedos isn't intended to be dos *exactly* but it is intended
> to be a free dos replacement.
> This is fine for those using emulators under other operating systems,
> and those who can see their screens.
> Ho
Hi!
> Well, brltty is for braille support, not speech output
The part of the problem where you have to fetch text from
dos to redirect it to another device is the same for both.
Work to improve cooperation of either with dos helps both.
By the way, there also was a project to port brltty to dos
Well, brltty is for braille support, not speech output, and I agree
that it is generally distributed separately.
However, speakup is physically part of the linux kernel (for those
distros that include it) though there are other screen readers (such
as yasr for text mode, and orca for gui outp
Hi!
> Last time I tried running my screen reader on freedos (admittedly, it
> was several years ago, and freedos wasn't anywhere near ver 1.0) it
> just plain didn't work.
Then try again. If you use NANSI, make sure to use the /R option to
force output via BIOS. FreeDOS uses BIOS int 10 function
Speaking of freedos 1.1.
I know freedos isn't intended to be dos *exactly* but it is intended
to be a free dos replacement.
This is fine for those using emulators under other operating systems,
and those who can see their screens.
However, I'm interested in using freedos as well, and not being
19 matches
Mail list logo
