Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Robert Riebisch]

>>> googling "Andreas Bauer", first hit:
>>> https://www.bauer-kirch.de/kontakt/details/andreas-bauer/
>>> 
>>> which is about as plausible author as it goes.
>> 
>> At least, it's a trace. We'll see. :-)
>> 
>>> has anybody tried to contact him?
>> 
>> I'll do so now.
> 
> Got a reply today. Wrong Andreas.
> 
> Will try some others.

Summary:
1) Wrote to 9 different Andreas'.
2) Got 3 replies with "I'm not this Andreas, but good luck".
3) The other 6 are probably not interested in giving feedback.

Cheers,
Robert
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page: 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] Package discussion

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Hi Eric:


My impression is that there would be FULL and EXTRA sized ISOs,
with "only online / on ibiblio" as being the third level of
escalation.


If my bird bath is full, and I add extra water to it, then it will overflow!

I tend to drop VIM as the largest - ELVIS still remains. 


I like Vim!


*Sound:*
I didn't see any discussion on this last time, so it's still open.


On the 32-bit PC I have with FreeDOS installed--I can only get the 
internal speaker beeping!



A Busybox clone?


Oh yuck! I hated that on an OpenMoko mobile-phone.

B.

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Robert Riebisch]

>> googling "Andreas Bauer", first hit:
>> https://www.bauer-kirch.de/kontakt/details/andreas-bauer/
>> 
>> which is about as plausible author as it goes.
> 
> At least, it's a trace. We'll see. :-)
> 
>> has anybody tried to contact him?
> 
> I'll do so now.

Got a reply today. Wrong Andreas.

Will try some others.

Cheers,
Robert
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page: 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] Package discussion

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Tom,

> googling TPPATCH easily leads to
> http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/repositories/latest/devel/tppatch.zip

Correct.

> looking into this, IMO Andreas Bauer just throws this at the world
> with a 'here it is. do with it whatever you want, but of course there
> are no warranties' attitude.  there is really no point to not distribute this
> unless you believe in this GPL religion.

Wasn't me...

>> "we didn't find a way to contact the author Andreas Bauer."
> 
> you really tried hard ?

Probably not (this year).

> googling "Andreas Bauer", first hit:
> https://www.bauer-kirch.de/kontakt/details/andreas-bauer/
> 
> which is about as plausible author as it goes.

At least, it's a trace. We'll see. :-)

> has anybody tried to contact him?

I'll do so now.

Cheers,
Robert
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page: 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] Package discussion

[tom ehlert]

>> TPPATCH is both small and really useful (runtime error fixer for
>> Borland compiled binaries which crash on too fast CPU, I believe?)

> But its license is unclear, because so far we didn't find a way to
> contact the author Andreas Bauer.

googling TPPATCH easily leads to
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/repositories/latest/devel/tppatch.zip

looking into this, IMO Andreas Bauer just throws this at the world
with a 'here it is. do with it whatever you want, but of course there
are no warranties' attitude.  there is really no point to not distribute this
unless you believe in this GPL religion.

> "we didn't find a way to contact the author Andreas Bauer."

you really tried hard ?

googling "Andreas Bauer", first hit:
https://www.bauer-kirch.de/kontakt/details/andreas-bauer/

which is about as plausible author as it goes.

has anybody tried to contact him?

Tom



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Eric,

> I would strip DJGPP-on-ISO to the minimal C, maybe C++ infrastructure
> (not sure what BN, BS, DB, FQ, FX, GC, GP, MK, OB, RH, TX are, would

>From "FD13LIVE.ISO\PACKAGES\DEVEL\INDEX.LST":
djgpp_bn2.21.1  DJGPP binutils: linker, assembler, etc...   65b9df0a
djgpp_bs2.4.1   DJGPP Bison (a parser generator that is compatible with
YACC)   ac9be808
djgpp_db7.5 DJGPP Debugger (GDB)facd0d92
djgpp_fq2.30DJGPP FAQ documentation bbb38562
djgpp_fx2.5.4   DJGPP Flex (fast lexical analyzer generator)eaeafdc3
djgpp_gc4.71DJGPP GCC (C compiler)  3d2f4b32
djgpp_gp4.71DJGPP GPP (C++ compiler)4cdae694
djgpp_mk3.79.1  DJGPP make  64f0fd12
djgpp_ob4.71DJGPP Objective-C compiler  2a8503e3
djgpp_rh1.5 DJGPP RHIDE editor  71ed74d1
djgpp_tx4.12DJGPP Texinfo (info file viewer)261693f1

Not that hard...

> TPPATCH is both small and really useful (runtime error fixer for
> Borland compiled binaries which crash on too fast CPU, I believe?)

But its license is unclear, because so far we didn't find a way to
contact the author Andreas Bauer.

>> *Emulators:*
>> These are basically games.
> 
> Worse, they are infrastructure to run games, lacking the games.
> And they are pretty specialized, so I would move them to online.

+1

>> *Networking:*
>> Feedback is to keep the networking packages. I'm not sure about Gopherus,
>> but it's "retro" and not too big (2MB) so I have no problems keeping it.
> 
> That is larger than expected - make Gopherus EXTRA / ONLINE?
> 
>> *to keep:* arachne crynwr curl dillo dwol e1000pkt e100pkt ethtools fdnet
>> gopherus htget links lynx m2wat mskermit mtcp newsnuz ntool picosntp
>> picotcp ping rsync ssh2dos sshdos vmsmount vncview wattcp wget
>> 
>> *added from Utilities:* terminal
> 
> Hey that reminds me that FileMaven3 offers serial port file transfer :-)
> Do we have other "file link" type of in-house computer connector tools?

Nothing FLOSS, but some freeware:


>> Programs that I think are no longer needed and should be dropped
>> include gifsicle (manipulates GIF images) and Hide In Picture
>> (steganography program that hides files inside pictures).
> 
> Correct.

As the "maintainer" of the DOS port of Gifsicle: That's okay.

>> Also could remove PasswordBox, since a password manager on DOS has
>> limited usefulness
> 
> Oh yes.

No. Then we could also remove FreeBASIC, because *I* don't use it.
Funny note: PasswordBox is written in FreeBASIC.

With some changes one could make it his personal secret diary.

>> pdTree seems to provide duplicate functionality to Tree in the "Base"
> 
> Not sure. What are the features? I remember liking LCD (from dosemu?)
> which is an interactive change directory.

pdTree is listed on .

>> Also drop the utilities (4dos paint2 start) that have license concerns.
> 
> That is disappointing regarding 4DOS. Not sure about PAINT2.

Maybe doing a new FLOSS paint program would be an idea for newly joined
Aniket.

> And start - no idea. Regarding the checksum tools, we could
> use a few fresh algorithms for those, beyond MD5, SHA1 etc.
> I guess DAA2ISO is useful for some virtual machines? DZEMM
> still is only useful for Windows as far as I know :-p

'DAA2ISO is a program for converting the DAA and GBI files ("Direct
Access Archive" used by PowerISO and gBurner) to standard ISO.'

As the "maintainer" of the DOS port of DAA2ISO: Drop it.

Cheers,
Robert
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page: 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] Package discussion

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Mateusz,

>> In my scheme the system would only have two ISOs: the basic,
>>and 
>>a TBD "extras". 
> 
> Myself I do not have a very fast internet connectivity. When I download DOS, 
> I prefer to download the strict minimum (MSDOS equivalent, ca 5MiB) and then 
> fetch the 2 or 3 extra things I like through FDNPKG (without sources).

I second that, because:
1) It's like MS-DOS (+ a /few/ updates).
2) It would make releasing new FD versions easier. New releases can
happen more often.
3) We could probably make some progress with bugfixing and enhancing the
kernel and FreeCOM (and drivers), because we get more feedback from
users, that something is not working in a new version. -- Yes, it sounds
a little like 'bananaware'. So, older (working) releases should be kept
online always.

Cheers,
Robert
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page: 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] Package discussion

[Jerome Shidel]

HI Eric,

By no means is anything final yet. 

And of course, it all comes down to what Jim decides.


> On Dec 18, 2020, at 4:03 PM, Eric Auer  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Jerome!
> 
> I know that this will often change, but which
> sizes (roughly) do you have in mind for:
> 
>> RELEASE DISC — contains BASE & FULL install
>> BONUS DISC — contains Extras
>> LiveCD — (LiveCD pre-installed packages AND can install base/full)
> 
> It is interesting that there will be no BASE-only CD
> and that the floppy distro is not necessarily some
> superset of BASE, nor exactly BASE, if I understand
> you correctly?
> 
> I remember that in the past there was the idea to
> make a live CD smaller by having BASE pre-installed
> and install the rest to a (large!) ramdisk, but I
> guess having more packages pre-installed without
> having to have enough RAM is a good thing :-)

( When I say unchanged… That does not mean no changes. 
It just means that for the most part, it provides the same function
through the same or similar set of programs. )

That was really, a way too over simplified list. 

So, I’ll try and expand on what I meant and the possible plan.

USB sticks — Probably going away. The main reason being, 
most users that create a USB stick do so by converting 
one of the CD’s to a bootable USB using Rufus or other
such program. This makes them redundant and mostly
useless.

Floppy boot disk — Probably unchanged. It will remain as a
fall back boot option for those going to install from CD that
are unable to boot one of the CDs )

LegacyCD -- Will be capable of installing FreeDOS to HD as
either BASE or FULL. Although it may contain some things
like network drivers and a few other utilities that are included
on the media that do not get installed (Those may just be 
moved into FULL to avoid confusion). It will no longer contain 
all of the EXTRAS.

LiveCD -- It will continue to function like it does at present. It uses
a RAM disk when possible. But, falls back to a pre-installed version 
of BASE on the disc when required.

For the most part, only BASE is pre-installed on the CD. There
may be a few programs that also get pre-installed. But, most
of the other packages that are brought “live” are done “on-the-fly”
into a RAM drive when the disc boots. There a a couple reasons
for it. Partially, it is for conserving space on the disc.

It can also install FreeDOS BASE or FULL to the hard disk.

BonusCD — All packages not restricted to existing only on the 
online repo and that are not part of a FULL install.

Floppy Edition — At present… BASE install. Plus usually,
FDNET and some CD drivers to facilitate getting more packages.
Call it BASE+. BASE+ should contain the same packages as 
what get’s installed as the BASE option from either CD. So, 
I guess those install BASE+ as well. 

Unfortunately since FULL is kinda up in the air right now, 
I really can’t give sizes at present. However, I don’t expect
the Floppy Edition to change that much. Also as a reference, 
the LiteUSB stick included no extras. So, that was more or less
the size required for the FULL package set. 

If I recall correctly, BASE without sources is roughly 16mb installed.

IMHO, FULL without sources would be limited to around 100mb. It 
should be BASE, a bunch of useful utilities, maybe a couple really
good games, and few if any development tools. 

I don’t think users want to spend an hour or so installing every package
we have. Just to play some DOS games or use a specific program.  

> 
> Regards, Eric

:-)

Jerome




___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Mateusz Viste]

On December 18, 2020 9:01:09 PM GMT+01:00, Ray Davison  
wrote:
> In my scheme the system would only have two ISOs: the basic,
>and 
>a TBD "extras". 

Myself I do not have a very fast internet connectivity. When I download DOS, I 
prefer to download the strict minimum (MSDOS equivalent, ca 5MiB) and then 
fetch the 2 or 3 extra things I like through FDNPKG (without sources).

Mateusz


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jerome!

I know that this will often change, but which
sizes (roughly) do you have in mind for:

> RELEASE DISC — contains BASE & FULL install
> BONUS DISC — contains Extras
> LiveCD — (LiveCD pre-installed packages AND can install base/full)

It is interesting that there will be no BASE-only CD
and that the floppy distro is not necessarily some
superset of BASE, nor exactly BASE, if I understand
you correctly?

I remember that in the past there was the idea to
make a live CD smaller by having BASE pre-installed
and install the rest to a (large!) ramdisk, but I
guess having more packages pre-installed without
having to have enough RAM is a good thing :-)

Regards, Eric



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Jerome Shidel]

Hi Ray,

> On Dec 18, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Ray Davison  wrote:
> 
> Jerome Shidel wrote:
> 
>> To create a custom CD for each user who downloads FreeDOS is not practical. 
> 
> Where in all this discussion did anyone suggest "a custom CD for each user”?  

I misunderstood what you meant in your previous message. 

> In my scheme the system would only have two ISOs: the basic, and a TBD 
> "extras".  The user would create his own custom bit-by-bit as he decided to 
> try something not included in the basic.  He could DL the extras ISO, or get 
> what he wanted from the archive as he wanted it.

At present, I think we are looking at: (Actual packages in each still TBD)

RELEASE DISC — contains BASE & FULL install
BONUS DISC — contains Extras

LiveCD — Packages checked as LiveCD are up and ready to use when the LiveCD is 
booted. This Disc also can install BASE or FULL to the hard disk. 
FloppyEdition — Packages checked as Floppy, 

Official Repo — All Packages in BASE, FULL, EXTRA and more not supplied on any 
media.


> I predict that many would not go beyond the basic, and DL of extras would be 
> spread out over time.
> 
> Ray

:-)

Jerome

___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Ray Davison]

Jerome Shidel wrote:

To create a custom CD for each user who downloads FreeDOS is not practical. 


Where in all this discussion did anyone suggest "a custom CD for each 
user"?  In my scheme the system would only have two ISOs: the basic, and 
a TBD "extras".  The user would create his own custom bit-by-bit as he 
decided to try something not included in the basic.  He could DL the 
extras ISO, or get what he wanted from the archive as he wanted it.


I predict that many would not go beyond the basic, and DL of extras 
would be spread out over time.


Ray



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Hi Jerome:


I’m confused…


Thanks for your funny response!


pandoc — Document Markup Language Format Conversion Utility.
manuskript — A novel writing tool for authors.

What are you trying to accomplish?


I am polishing a memoir. Manuskript refers to pandoc compilation 
options. But trying to use it gives errors. Files were not found where 
expected!



I thought about separating sections into pages. But, I loath surveys that keep 
feeding you
page after page with no end in site. Ones where you must go through dozens of 
pages. Then
finally get to the last page and then they demand your phone number or 
something.


I hate Centrelink social security. Its monstrous form had say five 
sections. All of which must be completed. Then I get rejected. A clerk 
disliked my answers to section 1!



Do you think a “save for later” button would help?


I've dithered five years. I'm late writing my memoir. "Too hard", comes 
to mind.

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Jerome Shidel]

Hi Bryan,

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 6:58 PM, Bryan Kilgallin  wrote:
> 
> Hi Jerome:
> 
>> Hopefully, I can clarify the directions.
>> Possibly update the page as well.
>> What part do you not understand?
> 
> Yesterday I tried to get pandoc working with manuskript. But I soon gave up. 
> Deeming the feature too hard!

I’m confused…

pandoc — Document Markup Language Format Conversion Utility.
manuskript — A novel writing tool for authors.

What are you trying to accomplish?

> Lots of choices requiring research, [sigh] would inspire anxiety.

I thought about separating sections into pages. But, I loath surveys that keep 
feeding you 
page after page with no end in site. Ones where you must go through dozens of 
pages. Then
finally get to the last page and then they demand your phone number or 
something. 

Do you think a “save for later” button would help? 

:-)

Jerome

___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Hi Jerome:


Hopefully, I can clarify the directions.
Possibly update the page as well.

What part do you not understand?


Yesterday I tried to get pandoc working with manuskript. But I soon gave 
up. Deeming the feature too hard!


Lots of choices requiring research, [sigh] would inspire anxiety.
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Jerome Shidel]

Hi Bryan,

> On Dec 16, 2020, at 11:16 PM, Bryan Kilgallin  wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Ray:
> 
>> Take a survey.  How many want to make or modify DOS apps.
> 
> I have trouble just following instructions.

Hopefully, I can clarify the directions. 
Possibly update the page as well.

What part do you not understand?

:-)

Jerome





___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Jerome Shidel]

Hi Ray,

> On Dec 16, 2020, at 8:51 PM, Ray Davison  wrote:

> So what you call "basic" would be one ISO.  Then a blivet ISO of anything you 
> want to put on it, but no sources or programming apps. Take a survey.  How 
> many want to make or modify DOS apps.

If I understand what you meant, it is not practical.

After the initial downloads of 1.2, if I remember correctly, it has still 
averaged 50,000+ downloads a month. Thats more than 1 every minute. To create a 
custom CD for each user who downloads FreeDOS is not practical. It takes 45 
minutes to an hour for the RBE to build a release. Sure, once the release is 
made the process to customize it could be optimized. That is similar to how the 
Repo builds a updated package CD whenever packages are updated. That process is 
mostly optimized. Yet still takes about 5 minutes or so to complete.

A highly optimized process to push custom could be made. However, it would 
still take about 1-2 minutes. This would put a very heavy load on the official 
server. Since the storage and bandwidth are provided by a University, it would 
be quite rude to keep their CPU usage pegged all the time. 

Even if we did it anyway, there would still be an every growing queue and after 
the first month their would be 25,000+ people waiting on their custom copy.

:-)

Jerome

___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Regan Russell]

I want to make applications om everything including DOS with Watcom C/C++ but 
to be honest who has the time...


From: Bryan Kilgallin 
Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2020 3:16 PM
To: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net 
Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

Thanks, Ray:

> Take
> a survey.  How many want to make or modify DOS apps.

I have trouble just following instructions!
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
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] Package discussion

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Thanks, Ray:

Take 
a survey.  How many want to make or modify DOS apps.


I have trouble just following instructions!
--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Ray Davison]

Jim Hall wrote:


What do you think?


I see two disks and an archive.

My primary word processor and accounting programs are DOS.  Yes I have 
"modern" versions for those functions, but I do not consider them to be 
improvements.  It is extra work to chase stuff around a screen.


So what you call "basic" would be one ISO.  Then a blivet ISO of 
anything you want to put on it, but no sources or programming apps. Take 
a survey.  How many want to make or modify DOS apps.


Sources and whatever else is left is archive.  With an index/contents 
included on both ISOs.


TY
Ray



___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Bryan Kilgallin]

Yes, ZB:


I dare to estimate that more than 90% of DOS - or any other OS - users don't
need any sources. Maybe even I should say: "more than 99%".

Sources should be available separately - they are nothing but "placeholder"
otherwise.


I have no use for source-code of software that makes DOS happen. To me, 
its existence only serves to confuse!

--
members.iinet.net.au/~kilgallin/


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[ZB]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 09:14:44AM +0100, Mateusz Viste wrote:

> On 14/12/2020 01:22, ZB wrote:
> > I think before taking such decision it would be worthy to browse the list
> > again, but after doing "sort by size desc" first. Because the bigger the
> > file the more closely it's worthy to look at it
> 
> This leads to a situations where software is becoming less likely to be
> included when its sources are big -- even though the software itself (once
> compiled) might be tiny.

I dare to estimate that more than 90% of DOS - or any other OS - users don't
need any sources. Maybe even I should say: "more than 99%".

Sources should be available separately - they are nothing but "placeholder"
otherwise.

What I meant was binary's size
-- 
regards,
Zbigniew


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Mateusz Viste]

On 14/12/2020 01:22, ZB wrote:

I think before taking such decision it would be worthy to browse the list
again, but after doing "sort by size desc" first. Because the bigger the
file the more closely it's worthy to look at it


This leads to a situations where software is becoming less likely to be 
included when its sources are big -- even though the software itself 
(once compiled) might be tiny. The sane thing to do in my opinion (which 
I do since many years in Svarog386) is to drop sources from packages, 
and make them available through in different way (separate CD, DVD or 
online).


The Svarog386 CD is 300 MiB, but when sources are included it grows to 
470 MiB. If it reaches 700 MiB one day I will turn it into a DVD.


Mateusz


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Mateusz Viste]

>Gopherus,
>> but it's "retro" and not too big (2MB) so I have no problems keeping
>it.
>
>That is larger than expected - make Gopherus EXTRA / ONLINE?

The (old, 1.1) 32 bit version was about 400 KiB, zipped. The newer (1.2+) 16 
bit version is under 100 KiB zipped.

Mateusz






On December 14, 2020 1:56:40 AM GMT+01:00, Eric Auer  wrote:
>
>Hi Jim,
>
>> Let me know your thoughts!
>
>Sure!
>
>> And a reminder that "To drop" only means "not included in the FreeDOS
>> distribution." We will still have them available in the FreeDOS
>archive
>
>My impression is that there would be FULL and EXTRA sized ISOs,
>with "only online / on ibiblio" as being the third level of
>escalation. And my general tendency is to have many smaller
>packages at least in EXTRA, maybe even in FULL and the live
>CD, so 1. we can show off our versatile app collection and
>2. people can use a lot of stuff without having to download
>things, in particular given DOS not being very online as OS.
>
>Although the virtual meeting also had good news about a new
>curated set of network drivers to be published, thanks O.Y.!
>
>
>> *Base:*
>> Keep everything, except the outdated sample config package.
>
>Ask for volunteers for an updated sample config? Otherwise: Cool.
>
>> *Archivers:*
>> Keep everything, except the packages as indicated in the wiki that
>are not
>> open source. Include everything in the "Live" CD. But only install
>zip &
>> unzip with the "Base" and "Full" distribution (the others should go
>in
>> "Extras" so they are not installed by default)
>
>I vote to also include full 7ZIP, plus *possibly* tar and lha, because
>users may enjoy a real tar? NOT if tar needs external gzip/bzip2. The
>reason to include LHA is being able to unpack LHA and LZH files, which
>were quite popular once. Note that 7zip can handle ZIP, CAB and maybe
>RAR (does the DOS version also do the last two?) as well as GZIP, BZIP2
>and TAR as well as combinations thereof and various additional funky
>formats (LZMA2, XZ, ARJ, CPIO, RPM, DEB, ISO and filesystem images).
>
>If the DOS 7ZIP does not support CAB, I also vote to include CABEXT
>(like 7ZIP both for the live CD and FULL) because it allows unpacking
>some files in certain cases when DOS drivers / apps are shipped as a
>"side-effect" of some windows software with windows based installers.
>
>> *to keep [only in "Extras"]:* 7zdec arj bz2 cabext gzip lpq1 lzip
>> lzma lzop p7zip tar zoo
>> 
>> *to drop:* lha unrar
>
>> *Boot Tools:*
>> These are small, but "ROM" boot utilities are not generally useful.
>
>I agree, but I would not drop syslinux. With memdisk, this class of
>boot utilities has helped to make bootable DOS media in various cases.
>
>> *Development:*
>
>It is impressive how un-DOS-like the sizes of certain compilers and
>interpreters are now :-p And of course, some languages are exotic.
>
>I would strip DJGPP-on-ISO to the minimal C, maybe C++ infrastructure
>(not sure what BN, BS, DB, FQ, FX, GC, GP, MK, OB, RH, TX are, would
>be nice to have long package names at least in the websites). So no
>RHIDE and no Objective C and similar in FULL, move those to ONLINE
>or at least EXTRA? Similarily, a less bloated IA16 C subset please.
>
>While I dislike the size, I agree that FreeBASIC and FreePascal are
>appropriate to keep. Not completely sure about the (outdated?) Perl.
>
>> *to keep:* bwbasic cpp2ccmt DJGPP (*djgpp djgpp_bn djgpp_bs djgpp_db
>> djgpp_fq djgpp_fx djgpp_gc djgpp_gp djgpp_mk djgpp_ob djgpp_rh
>djgpp_tx*)
>> fasm FreeBASIC (*fbc fbc_help*) fpc IA16GCC (*gcc-ia16 i16budoc
>i16butil
>> i16gcc i16gcdoc i16newli i16src*) *insight* jwasm nasm ow perl regina
>> *runtime* upx
>> 
>> *to drop:* bcc euphoria lua msa suppls tinyasm tppatch
>
>TPPATCH is both small and really useful (runtime error fixer for
>Borland compiled binaries which crash on too fast CPU, I believe?)
>and LUA and TINYASM also seem to have favorable size/use ratios.
>
>For SUPPL, I suggest to ship FreeCOM sources bundled with SUPPL,
>if that is not already happening anyway. What else would use it?
>
>> *additional questions: Is the Insight debugger still used/useful?
>
>Not sure, I positively remember the 386SWAT debugger and DPMIONE
>in any case! Those should be included. Insight sounded nice, too,
>but I have not really used it yet.
>
>> The 'Development' group is very big; should
>> these be installed during a "Full" install?
>
>Good question. It should be part of SOME of the ISOs in any case.
>
>> *Editors:*
>> I don't know what to suggest here. I think we all have our favorites.
>
>I tend to drop VIM as the largest - ELVIS still remains.
>MINED and SETEDIT are next in size: I do not know MINED,
>but SETEDIT is quite powerful. Most others are small, so
>we can indeed include all of those even in FULL :-) And
>VIM can stay in EXTRA or online (are those 2 the same?)
>
>> I think keep them unless there's a good reason to drop one.
>
>> *to keep:* biew blocek doshexed e3 elvis fed freemacs mbedit mined
>msedit
>> 

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[Eric Auer]

Hi Jim,

> Let me know your thoughts!

Sure!

> And a reminder that "To drop" only means "not included in the FreeDOS
> distribution." We will still have them available in the FreeDOS archive

My impression is that there would be FULL and EXTRA sized ISOs,
with "only online / on ibiblio" as being the third level of
escalation. And my general tendency is to have many smaller
packages at least in EXTRA, maybe even in FULL and the live
CD, so 1. we can show off our versatile app collection and
2. people can use a lot of stuff without having to download
things, in particular given DOS not being very online as OS.

Although the virtual meeting also had good news about a new
curated set of network drivers to be published, thanks O.Y.!


> *Base:*
> Keep everything, except the outdated sample config package.

Ask for volunteers for an updated sample config? Otherwise: Cool.

> *Archivers:*
> Keep everything, except the packages as indicated in the wiki that are not
> open source. Include everything in the "Live" CD. But only install zip &
> unzip with the "Base" and "Full" distribution (the others should go in
> "Extras" so they are not installed by default)

I vote to also include full 7ZIP, plus *possibly* tar and lha, because
users may enjoy a real tar? NOT if tar needs external gzip/bzip2. The
reason to include LHA is being able to unpack LHA and LZH files, which
were quite popular once. Note that 7zip can handle ZIP, CAB and maybe
RAR (does the DOS version also do the last two?) as well as GZIP, BZIP2
and TAR as well as combinations thereof and various additional funky
formats (LZMA2, XZ, ARJ, CPIO, RPM, DEB, ISO and filesystem images).

If the DOS 7ZIP does not support CAB, I also vote to include CABEXT
(like 7ZIP both for the live CD and FULL) because it allows unpacking
some files in certain cases when DOS drivers / apps are shipped as a
"side-effect" of some windows software with windows based installers.

> *to keep [only in "Extras"]:* 7zdec arj bz2 cabext gzip lpq1 lzip
> lzma lzop p7zip tar zoo
> 
> *to drop:* lha unrar

> *Boot Tools:*
> These are small, but "ROM" boot utilities are not generally useful.

I agree, but I would not drop syslinux. With memdisk, this class of
boot utilities has helped to make bootable DOS media in various cases.

> *Development:*

It is impressive how un-DOS-like the sizes of certain compilers and
interpreters are now :-p And of course, some languages are exotic.

I would strip DJGPP-on-ISO to the minimal C, maybe C++ infrastructure
(not sure what BN, BS, DB, FQ, FX, GC, GP, MK, OB, RH, TX are, would
be nice to have long package names at least in the websites). So no
RHIDE and no Objective C and similar in FULL, move those to ONLINE
or at least EXTRA? Similarily, a less bloated IA16 C subset please.

While I dislike the size, I agree that FreeBASIC and FreePascal are
appropriate to keep. Not completely sure about the (outdated?) Perl.

> *to keep:* bwbasic cpp2ccmt DJGPP (*djgpp djgpp_bn djgpp_bs djgpp_db
> djgpp_fq djgpp_fx djgpp_gc djgpp_gp djgpp_mk djgpp_ob djgpp_rh djgpp_tx*)
> fasm FreeBASIC (*fbc fbc_help*) fpc IA16GCC (*gcc-ia16 i16budoc i16butil
> i16gcc i16gcdoc i16newli i16src*) *insight* jwasm nasm ow perl regina
> *runtime* upx
> 
> *to drop:* bcc euphoria lua msa suppls tinyasm tppatch

TPPATCH is both small and really useful (runtime error fixer for
Borland compiled binaries which crash on too fast CPU, I believe?)
and LUA and TINYASM also seem to have favorable size/use ratios.

For SUPPL, I suggest to ship FreeCOM sources bundled with SUPPL,
if that is not already happening anyway. What else would use it?

> *additional questions: Is the Insight debugger still used/useful?

Not sure, I positively remember the 386SWAT debugger and DPMIONE
in any case! Those should be included. Insight sounded nice, too,
but I have not really used it yet.

> The 'Development' group is very big; should
> these be installed during a "Full" install?

Good question. It should be part of SOME of the ISOs in any case.

> *Editors:*
> I don't know what to suggest here. I think we all have our favorites.

I tend to drop VIM as the largest - ELVIS still remains.
MINED and SETEDIT are next in size: I do not know MINED,
but SETEDIT is quite powerful. Most others are small, so
we can indeed include all of those even in FULL :-) And
VIM can stay in EXTRA or online (are those 2 the same?)

> I think keep them unless there's a good reason to drop one.

> *to keep:* biew blocek doshexed e3 elvis fed freemacs mbedit mined msedit
> ospedit pico setedit tde uhex vim

> *Emulators:*
> These are basically games.

Worse, they are infrastructure to run games, lacking the games.
And they are pretty specialized, so I would move them to online.

A nosefart NES music player might be fun if free music is around?
The Atari 2600 emulator is small, so if free games exist for it?

> *Games:*
> General response from the last discussion was to make sure we have fun
> games in a few different genres, so 

Re: [Freedos-user] Package discussion

[ZB]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 06:05:08PM -0600, Jim Hall wrote:

> What do you think?

I think before taking such decision it would be worthy to browse the list
again, but after doing "sort by size desc" first. Because the bigger the
file the more closely it's worthy to look at it "is there a common need for
this, or probably not that much?".

For example that Watcom programming tools are of course very valuable - but
I believe they aren't in that common use among FreeDOS users. But their size
is counted in megabytes - while Insight, considered to be dropped, has a
little more than 200 KB of size
-- 
regards,
Zbigniew


___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user