Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Rugxulo,

> You're smart, you're a reasonable person. So why are you shutting down
> emotionally over this? Is it too stressful for you? Don't tell me I'm
> more patient than you are, I don't believe it. It's just not
> reasonable to ignore every problem, pretending that it will go away.

It will also not go away by "lamenting" over and over again...
Just ignore him and become a happy man again! :-)

Robert Riebisch
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page:  http://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead:  http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi again,

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Jim Hall  wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Rugxulo  wrote:
>
>> He doesn't know the meaning of joy.
>
> Reading this thread sucks any joy from me.

Jim, I'm sorry you had to endure this (again).

> Why is this thread still alive?

I wanted to clarify, still more, why we're still being (unfairly) "punished".

> Jack doesn't like FreeDOS, he doesn't release his drivers so that FreeDOS 
> users can use them

But he did release them freely ... until he got mad at me (or so he
claims, if you even believe that).

> - and Jack's drivers are proprietary, so we cannot include them in FreeDOS 
> anyway. We all know that.

Apparently *he* doesn't! I don't know why he can't "get" it. He still
acts like we want to drink through a straw with our eyes closed and
hands tied behind our backs instead of just taking a gulp like a
normal person.

> Rugxulo, we know you and Jack don't like each other.

I don't even know him, and he doesn't know me. It's not personal. He
just has lots of anger, and he (only) resents me implying that his
drivers were/are buggy. But it wasn't an insult against him, and I
wasn't even talking to him but instead someone else. So, for that
single harebrained reason, he wants to punish all users, especially
FreeDOS.

> Jack doesn't seem to like me, either.

But you didn't do anything to him either (AFAIK). He's just impatient
that you didn't ... I don't even know what, "remove" his (old? new?)
drivers I don't know what else he has demanded of you (besides
"fix SF.net", which is impossible).

> That's fine. Jack doesn't like a lot of people.

Indeed.

> But let it go, man. You said "He [Jack] is not doing anyone any
> favors, it's all out of spite." So why bother with Jack, then? Forget
> about him and let's move on.

Jim, in all fairness, that doesn't work! I tried ignoring him for
*months*, and he still came back, angrier and crazier than ever. So
why do you suggest I do what I already tried and failed? It doesn't
work!

I'm trying a different strategy, trying to relay important technical
details, in an attempt to debunk the myth that "Rugxulo is a FRAUD!"
and the idea that I somehow was "miffed" as him, which isn't true. His
"Mar-18" drivers just wouldn't even *boot* for me anymore, despite no
config changes! It was a flat out regression, but my hope that his
testers or he would find and fix that bug didn't pan out because he
got unfairly angry. I left him alone to sulk, but that didn't work! He
said he was giving up and going away, but that wasn't true!

You're savvy, you know that in Gmail you can find all message "to:"
and "from:" certain addresses. A quick check shows that I haven't
privately emailed him (old or even new address) since that fateful
"March 5" (2015) email where he explicitly said "I Give UP!" (just to
get me to leave him alone, because he didn't want my workarounds for
SF.net bug, because he claimed to be done with everything!). March 5th
was a week or two before I said elsewhere, "I'm not sure if they work
at all anymore".

from Jack, to me (in reverse chronological order):

Jan.   3, 2017 (new Earthlink email; re: HIMEMX and "Invalid opcode"
in kernel, says he sent one user updated drivers)
Jan.  14, 2016 (forwarded to me and others, claiming UIDE/XMGR as
"tainted", to try to force us to remove them)
May   16, 2015 (surprisingly email, half in response to SF.net bug
tracker, very insulting for bogus reasons)
March 12, 2015 (telling me to mirror 18-Mar-2015 drivers to iBiblio)
March  5, 2015 (where he explicitly says "I Give UP!" on helping us)

So yes, I did "drop" it, and I did leave him alone. I was not in
contact with him, and I didn't insult him or egg him on (at least not
directly, certainly he falsely sees every accidental criticism as a
personal attack).

So I stopped "bothering" him, at his request, in March 2015. And when
he closed sources, I didn't know why, but I told SF.net bug tracker
dude to close the bug since he didn't seem to care anymore. And even
that he didn't read until a month later! But he found it and berated
me heavily, blaming me. And I *ignored* him still! And yet he *still*
came back on freedos-user (mid June) and was extremely antagonistic
(insane, even) to me, which is where you (reluctantly) banned him in
July (thank God!).

So why are you surprised that I'm still talking about it? It never
goes away. Silence doesn't work. I tried that, but it just didn't
work. I know you're tired of hearing about it, but it's totally
irrational to let his warped perception influence anyone.

You're smart, you're a reasonable person. So why are you shutting down
emotionally over this? Is it too stressful for you? Don't tell me I'm
more patient than you are, I don't believe it. It's just not
reasonable to ignore every problem, pretending that it will go away.
Granted, incessant rambling doesn't help either, but I'm trying to be
technically honest here.

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Ralf Quint]

On 11/17/2017 4:45 PM, Jim Hall wrote:
> [..]
>
> Reading this thread sucks any joy from me.
>
> Why is this thread still alive?
>
> Jack doesn't like FreeDOS, he doesn't release his drivers so that
> FreeDOS users can use them - and Jack's drivers are proprietary, so we
> cannot include them in FreeDOS anyway. We all know that.
>
> Rugxulo, we know you and Jack don't like each other. Jack doesn't seem
> to like me, either. That's fine. Jack doesn't like a lot of people.
> But let it go, man. You said "He [Jack] is not doing anyone any
> favors, it's all out of spite." So why bother with Jack, then? Forget
> about him and let's move on.
+1


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jim Hall]

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Rugxulo  wrote:

 Jack does update drivers because he is a perfectionist,
>>>
>>> What good is a perfect painting if no one will see it? Why bake a
>>> gourmet meal and then throw it away?
>>
>> Maybe he's working on it for his own joy?
>
> He doesn't know the meaning of joy.
[..]

Reading this thread sucks any joy from me.

Why is this thread still alive?

Jack doesn't like FreeDOS, he doesn't release his drivers so that
FreeDOS users can use them - and Jack's drivers are proprietary, so we
cannot include them in FreeDOS anyway. We all know that.

Rugxulo, we know you and Jack don't like each other. Jack doesn't seem
to like me, either. That's fine. Jack doesn't like a lot of people.
But let it go, man. You said "He [Jack] is not doing anyone any
favors, it's all out of spite." So why bother with Jack, then? Forget
about him and let's move on.


Jim

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Rugxulo  wrote:
> Hi, Robert,
>
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Robert Riebisch  
> wrote:
>>
 Jack does update drivers because he is a perfectionist,
>>>
>>> What good is a perfect painting if no one will see it? Why bake a
>>> gourmet meal and then throw it away?
>>
>> Maybe he's working on it for his own joy?
>
> He doesn't know the meaning of joy.
>
> Re-reading some of his old posts on BTTR from 2007 shows a *very*
> angry person, and he has not improved since then. Thankfully, he went
> away from there so we've had some good years without his drama.
>
>>> I don't know, but I tried. I really tried to solve the situation. I
>>> know you think I'm being rude or pedantic, rehashing it over and over
>>> again, but he never goes away! He keeps saying he will, but he never
>>> does! Seriously, I'm not going to apologize to him when I did
>>> *nothing* to him! It's not like I'm asking *him* to grovel to us, but
>>> he needs to be honest (with himself and others)! Honesty is a virtue.
>>> Tell the truth, Jack! Stop portraying everyone else as an enemy when
>>> nobody did anything to you!
>>
>> Why do you waste so much energy in trying to understand Jack?
>
> He directly blames me for this fiasco (although it's clear he has
> issues with many others).
>
> It's also worse than that because he keeps constantly following us
> around, re-announcing his "new" drivers, but he never admits his
> mistakes! He keeps saying he'll go away, but he never does. It's not
> like I'm pestering him!
>
> It's not even open source, not even freeware, we can't even
> redistribute it, and *then* he adds (yet another) OEM ban in the
> software itself? Crazy! And he *still* wants attention.
>
>> You (or any other soul) probably never will, but does it *really* (!) matter?
>
> I can't fully understand him, no, but I have a good idea. Granted, he
> could be full of it and carrying a hidden agenda, but the truth is
> probably just mental illness. I tried to piece together the facts,
> just to demonstrate to others exactly why this is so irrational.
>
> Does it really matter? No, we don't need his drivers. I've half-joked
> "just use GNU/Linux [+ DOSEMU2 + FreeDOS]!!" because that works as
> well as isn't exactly weak or expensive or uncommon or non-free.
>
>> Rug, just be a gentleman and *respect* (= accept) his decisions, because
>> anything else will not lead to a healthy mind.
>
> Respect his decisions?? It's not like he's a kind and rational person.
> He doesn't have good reasons for his anger or his actions. All of his
> anger is irrational nonsense, and we don't deserve a lick of it. He
> gets nothing practical out of all of this drama, and his punishments
> are for imaginary crimes.
>
> He is not doing anyone any favors, it's all out of spite. Which is
> ridiculous when the root cause is all his own fault.
>
> It's *not* personal. He doesn't know me, and I don't know him. We are
> perfect strangers. But yes, he does have an axe to grind.
>
>> Do you know this short story?
>> "Two Monks and a Woman - a Zen Lesson"
>
> "All I did, was *reaching out my hand for peace* as I have done
> *several times* before, but all I get from you [Jack] are *personal
> insults*. So don't expect any help from me!" -- Robert Riebisch, 2007
>
> Ten years ago! And we're still dealing with his insanity!
>
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi, Robert,

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Robert Riebisch  wrote:
>
>>> Jack does update drivers because he is a perfectionist,
>>
>> What good is a perfect painting if no one will see it? Why bake a
>> gourmet meal and then throw it away?
>
> Maybe he's working on it for his own joy?

He doesn't know the meaning of joy.

Re-reading some of his old posts on BTTR from 2007 shows a *very*
angry person, and he has not improved since then. Thankfully, he went
away from there so we've had some good years without his drama.

>> I don't know, but I tried. I really tried to solve the situation. I
>> know you think I'm being rude or pedantic, rehashing it over and over
>> again, but he never goes away! He keeps saying he will, but he never
>> does! Seriously, I'm not going to apologize to him when I did
>> *nothing* to him! It's not like I'm asking *him* to grovel to us, but
>> he needs to be honest (with himself and others)! Honesty is a virtue.
>> Tell the truth, Jack! Stop portraying everyone else as an enemy when
>> nobody did anything to you!
>
> Why do you waste so much energy in trying to understand Jack?

He directly blames me for this fiasco (although it's clear he has
issues with many others).

It's also worse than that because he keeps constantly following us
around, re-announcing his "new" drivers, but he never admits his
mistakes! He keeps saying he'll go away, but he never does. It's not
like I'm pestering him!

It's not even open source, not even freeware, we can't even
redistribute it, and *then* he adds (yet another) OEM ban in the
software itself? Crazy! And he *still* wants attention.

> You (or any other soul) probably never will, but does it *really* (!) matter?

I can't fully understand him, no, but I have a good idea. Granted, he
could be full of it and carrying a hidden agenda, but the truth is
probably just mental illness. I tried to piece together the facts,
just to demonstrate to others exactly why this is so irrational.

Does it really matter? No, we don't need his drivers. I've half-joked
"just use GNU/Linux [+ DOSEMU2 + FreeDOS]!!" because that works as
well as isn't exactly weak or expensive or uncommon or non-free.

> Rug, just be a gentleman and *respect* (= accept) his decisions, because
> anything else will not lead to a healthy mind.

Respect his decisions?? It's not like he's a kind and rational person.
He doesn't have good reasons for his anger or his actions. All of his
anger is irrational nonsense, and we don't deserve a lick of it. He
gets nothing practical out of all of this drama, and his punishments
are for imaginary crimes.

He is not doing anyone any favors, it's all out of spite. Which is
ridiculous when the root cause is all his own fault.

It's *not* personal. He doesn't know me, and I don't know him. We are
perfect strangers. But yes, he does have an axe to grind.

> Do you know this short story?
> "Two Monks and a Woman - a Zen Lesson"

"All I did, was *reaching out my hand for peace* as I have done
*several times* before, but all I get from you [Jack] are *personal
insults*. So don't expect any help from me!" -- Robert Riebisch, 2007

Ten years ago! And we're still dealing with his insanity!

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Rugxulo,

>> Jack does update drivers because he is a perfectionist,
> 
> What good is a perfect painting if no one will see it? Why bake a
> gourmet meal and then throw it away?

Maybe he's working on it for his own joy?

> I don't know, but I tried. I really tried to solve the situation. I
> know you think I'm being rude or pedantic, rehashing it over and over
> again, but he never goes away! He keeps saying he will, but he never
> does! Seriously, I'm not going to apologize to him when I did
> *nothing* to him! It's not like I'm asking *him* to grovel to us, but
> he needs to be honest (with himself and others)! Honesty is a virtue.
> Tell the truth, Jack! Stop portraying everyone else as an enemy when
> nobody did anything to you!

Why do you waste so much energy in trying to understand Jack?
You (or any other soul) probably never will, but does it *really* (!)
matter?

Rug, just be a gentleman and *respect* (= accept) his decisions, because
anything else will not lead to a healthy mind.

Do you know this short story?
"Two Monks and a Woman - a Zen Lesson"


Robert Riebisch
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page:  http://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead:  http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi again,

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 1:47 AM, Rugxulo  wrote:
>
> 3). https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
>
> "What is free software?
>
> 'Free software' means software that respects users' freedom and
> community. Roughly, it means that the users have the freedom to run,
> copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. Thus, 'free
> software' is a matter of liberty, not price."

"
To understand the concept, you should think of 'free' as in 'free
speech,' not as in 'free beer'. We sometimes call it 'libre software,'
borrowing the French or Spanish word for 'free' as in freedom, to show
we do not mean the software is gratis.

We campaign for these freedoms because everyone deserves them. With
these freedoms, the users (both individually and collectively) control
the program and what it does for them. When users don't control the
program, we call it a 'nonfree' or 'proprietary' program. The nonfree
program controls the users, and the developer controls the program;
this makes the program an instrument of unjust power.

The four essential freedoms

A program is free software if the program's users have the four
essential freedoms:

* The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).

* The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does
your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a
precondition for this.

* The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).

* The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others
(freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance
to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a
precondition for this.

A program is free software if it gives users adequately all of these
freedoms. Otherwise, it is nonfree. While we can distinguish various
nonfree distribution schemes in terms of how far they fall short of
being free, we consider them all equally unethical.
"

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Tom Ehlert]

> What do these "Jack's Drivers" actually do?

nothing as they no longer work on FreeDOS.

btw: NEVER fullquote.

Tom


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Gregg Eshelman via Freedos-user
 wrote:
>
> What do these "Jack's Drivers" actually do?

Waste everyone's time.

(Just use Linux Linux Linux Linux Linux ...!)


(further response to Eric Auer inlined below)


> On Friday, November 17, 2017, 1:59:11 AM MST, Eric Auer 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Rugxulo,

Saluton,

> you are not going to make Jack any more kind by publicly
> sharing all private email details of your private fight...

How is it "private"? He publicly posts all kinds of rude things. The
only reason we ever had "private" email is mostly because he didn't
want to stay subscribed to freedos-user all the time (too much noise).
Oh, and also because later he couldn't even do that at all. Hence the
whole nasty May 16 (2015) private email that I never responded to
(since he'd already said, falsely, that he would go away).

There was no personal rapport between us. We never discussed anything
but boring technical software. We never discussed religion or
politics, and we never had a falling out. It's an accident that I know
literally anything about his personal life since we never discussed
things like that either.

Sure, he's obsessively angry about you-know-what-worldwide-event (that
ended before he was born), but who cares? I'm too young to care (or
brood) about that. And it's not fair (obviously) to punish innocent
people (who also weren't born yet) with rage about that either. Not to
beat a dead horse, but yes, when he constantly harps on it (and even
directs such specific insults to me), it's very annoying and immature.

I'm trying to be somewhat discreet here (especially because it sounds
ludicrous to even believe it, and I don't want to rile anyone up), but
he definitely harbors resentment. And FreeDOS is not immune to such
members.

> Jack does update drivers because he is a perfectionist,

What good is a perfect painting if no one will see it? Why bake a
gourmet meal and then throw it away?

> but he is also known for not liking the FreeDOS community

Who did nothing bad to him.

> (including in particular you)

Even more ridiculous, I spent dozens of hours trying to help him, and
he knew it!

And all it takes to piss him off is literally one innocuous sentence
to someone else: "Mar-18 won't boot on my Lenovo desktop" (but here's
a URL to download that exact version yourself if you want to try it).

> so it is no surprise

Really?? You think the proper reaction to this dispute was, "Well,
obviously I have to go closed source and insult everyone. (Obviously!
Obviously! Yes sir, obviously!)"

> that he fails to make nice announcements, share sources, etc.
> ... which is why almost everybody here stopped to care.

He literally gains nothing by being closed source. If there is zero
advantage, then why do it?

I can only surmise one or two possible theories, but each one involves
disregarding his public excuse entirely (as a flatout lie) and
pretending that he "needs" it to be closed for xyz advantage. (Which
is a stretch, and I don't believe it's true, but I guess anything's
possible.)

> I, too found it a bit silly that there even was a license,
> and for a while even code, for preventing FreeDOS use of
> the drivers.

FreeDOS has been low on volunteers for a long time. But it works
remarkably well. I like it a lot, obviously. So it's strange to see
someone kick us while we're down, so to speak. I'd almost consider it
rude to suggest Linux on such a forum, but Linux is so popular and
does so much (and is Free and ...). Does he not realize that
decreasing DOS functionality pushes away the few that are left? Does
he want us to go to Linux or Windows or ... ? Doubt it, he despises
them, and yet he despises us too.

> The "hack" problem was for one of the closed
> source releases: Somebody used a debugger to deobfuscate
> that driver to remove machine code which had deliberately
> made the driver unusable on FreeDOS. You cannot STEAL free
> software indeed but you can upset authors by spoiling their
> ability to upset users :-p So yes, you can call it a HACK.
> Note that this was many years ago, long forgotten by many.

Was it ever made public? AFAIK, no. And BTW, even back then we still
had "old" versions of his drivers. Seriously, he's had hundreds of
versions of these by now (or at least several branches / renames).
It's not that hard to find some old version.

> So what should I say? We already know everything about the situation.

Obviously, we don't, because people keep repeating the same old
misinformation. I'm just saying, *to me*, as someone who is unfairly
in the middle of this (for no good reason), it's irrational. Jack
needs to wake up, grow up, get a grip.

> There is no point in reiterating again and again
> that fights between humans keep machines from enjoying nice
> drivers here, as this is not going to change that anyway.

Software is very logical, deterministic. The cpu doesn't randomly get
mad and 

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Eric Auer]

Hi Gregg,

> What do these "Jack's Drivers" actually do?

RDISK: Ramdisk

UDVD2: CD / DVD low-level drivers, UDMA, cache via UHDD

UHDD: fast UDMA disk I/O, cache (harddisk/SSD/CD/DVD)

XMGR: XMS / HMA memory driver

All drivers are optimized for low consumption of
DOS memory, while they can use large amounts of
XMS memory (RDISK, UHDD) if the user wants that.

XMGR can be combined with UMBPCI and JEMM386 for
UMB / EMS and can improve stability compared to
HIMEMX XMS / HMA and JEMMEX (all-in-one memory).

The disk / optical drive drivers help to improve
I/O speed and support various controller types.

Regards, Eric


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Gregg Eshelman via Freedos-user]

What do these "Jack's Drivers" actually do?
 

On Friday, November 17, 2017, 1:59:11 AM MST, Eric Auer 
 wrote:  
 
 Hi Rugxulo,

you are not going to make Jack any more kind by publicly
sharing all private email details of your private fight...

Jack does update drivers because he is a perfectionist,
but he is also known for not liking the FreeDOS community
(including in particular you) so it is no surprise that
he fails to make nice announcements, share sources, etc.
... which is why almost everybody here stopped to care.

I, too found it a bit silly that there even was a license,
and for a while even code, for preventing FreeDOS use of
the drivers. The "hack" problem was for one of the closed
source releases: Somebody used a debugger to deobfuscate
that driver to remove machine code which had deliberately
made the driver unusable on FreeDOS. You cannot STEAL free
software indeed but you can upset authors by spoiling their
ability to upset users :-p So yes, you can call it a HACK.
Note that this was many years ago, long forgotten by many.

So what should I say? We already know everything about the
situation. There is no point in reiterating again and again
that fights between humans keep machines from enjoying nice
drivers here, as this is not going to change that anyway.  --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Eric Auer]

Hi Rugxulo,

you are not going to make Jack any more kind by publicly
sharing all private email details of your private fight...

Jack does update drivers because he is a perfectionist,
but he is also known for not liking the FreeDOS community
(including in particular you) so it is no surprise that
he fails to make nice announcements, share sources, etc.
... which is why almost everybody here stopped to care.

I, too found it a bit silly that there even was a license,
and for a while even code, for preventing FreeDOS use of
the drivers. The "hack" problem was for one of the closed
source releases: Somebody used a debugger to deobfuscate
that driver to remove machine code which had deliberately
made the driver unusable on FreeDOS. You cannot STEAL free
software indeed but you can upset authors by spoiling their
ability to upset users :-p So yes, you can call it a HACK.
Note that this was many years ago, long forgotten by many.

So what should I say? We already know everything about the
situation. There is no point in reiterating again and again
that fights between humans keep machines from enjoying nice
drivers here, as this is not going to change that anyway.

Cheers, Eric



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Robert Riebisch  wrote:
>
>> For anyone relatively new to the FreeDOS email lists, Jack's drivers come up 
>> every once in a while.

It's mainly because he obsessively updates them, and he craves
attention (despite being banned), even though he doesn't even use
"FleaDOS" (as he calls us)!

Also, some few misguided people keep recommending the drivers to us,
even if they are (now, unfairly) closed source! (Why??)

>> Jack writes good code

Yes and no.

"Mar-05" (2015) seems to basically works fine ... not that he was kind
enough to tell us about that "release". I only found it by checking
his friend's DropBox. So we were still only mirroring the Oct-whatever
(2014) version because he made so many laborious stipulations
(paraphrased, "don't mirror unless I can announce it myself via
freedos-user!"). March 5th was when he explicitly "gave up" (on
FreeDOS, SF.net, x86 PCs!) just to get me to leave him alone.

Even though I had spent months trying to get him to resolve (well,
workaround) his SF.net certificate issue (which you, Jim, created a
bug ticket for on SF.net since he directly emailed both of us
privately [Nov. 13, 2014] to help him!), he still wasn't happy.

https://sourceforge.net/p/forge/site-support/9091/

And yet he later emailed me privately (March 12 [sic]), telling me to
also mirror iBiblio the new "Mar-18" since "Mar-05" had "magically
appeared" without announcement. But that later one wouldn't boot for
me anymore.

Jim, on March 14 [sic], 2015, I emailed you explaining this:

"So now I downloaded [Mar-18 drivers], but for whatever reason, my
system didn't boot correctly.
I was too busy to try to figure out why, so I just assumed it was a
regression and reverted.
(Remember, Jack doesn't use FreeDOS, and I have no idea if his
'testers' [if anybody left:
Johnson? Khusraw?] reliably tests every minor release.)"

>> but he tends to get very upset very quickly, and then lashes out at people.

On March 17, 2015, I wrote to mvojvodic on BTTR's forum:

"If you want to try his latest drivers (Mar-18) [sic], grab them from
his DropBox, but since he doesn't even use FreeDOS (only MS-DOS 6.22),
I'm not sure if they work at all anymore
[link to DropBox URL]"

On May 16, 2015, Jack wrote to me privately, insulting me heavily
(most of which I will not quote here, although he's used similar
insults to many others before). Most of his wrath was a delayed
response to my (April 4) post to Zangune on the SF.net bug tracker. He
still acted offended that we would dare suggest he upgrade his web
browser to a newer, freeware version that ran on his unsupported OS
[NT 4] (or similar workarounds). "Microsoft and Intel shills", he
called us, even though we tried to find him free workarounds.

But he also said this:

"I went to close-source drivers because, AND ONLY BECAUSE, of the following
[my above BTTR post, based solely on one sentence:  "I'm not sure if
[the drivers] work at all anymore"]"

So that one sentence he took out of context, so he claims to 100%
blame me. (Which is bogus and makes no sense.)

Despite me later telling him several times that he was wrong, *despite
him openly acknowledging and pretending to understand this* (June 15
on freedos-user), he still went literally insane (June 30 on
freedos-user) and was very abusive on this mailing list (and seemed to
not understand what we'd already discussed).

So his June 15 email made it very clear that he understood. I was not
vague. And yet his June 30 email was the one where he can't seem to
understand the difference between "Mar-05" and "Mar-18". And that is
the questionable email that I wonder if he even was the author. In
fact, I still don't know how he got back on the mailing list since
*that was the whole point of me emailing him, for months at a time!!*
That was the whole issue that I couldn't get him to resolve, and he
was tired of hearing my help, so he (falsely said) "I Give UP!" on
everything! (So he "gave up" before he went closed source, based upon
his own incompetence. Or maybe he just lied about his reasoning.)

>> He has brought a lot of ill will here.

He likes calling people names, especially those of a certain nation,
which he apparently dislikes heavily. (Hey, Johnson Lam, even beloved
hero, Bruce Lee, shared lineage with that wonderful nation! Isn't that
great news?? No wonder he was so successful!)

I even found an old post on BTTR (Nov. 7, 2007) where you, Robert,
publicly posted an email from him where he was very rude to you. Yes,
his behavior is ridiculous and unfair, but at least you're not alone!
You're not the only target of his (unjustified) wrath.

>> It's no surprise that Jack keeps adding notices in his software "license" 
>> that says you cannot use his program on or with FreeDOS.

I wouldn't know, I can't check the binaries since he forbids
redistribution, is closed source, and hates everyone.

But my guess is that it's not license prohibition but instead OEM 

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Jim,

> For anyone relatively new to the FreeDOS email lists, Jack's drivers
> come up every once in a while. Jack writes good code, but he tends to
> get very upset very quickly, and then lashes out at people. He has
> brought a lot of ill will here. It's no surprise that Jack keeps
> adding notices in his software "license" that says you cannot use his
> program on or with FreeDOS.

His famous "last" words from :
"Thanks" to the people in FreeDOS forum, all kind of insult, hack, steal
and modify Jack's drivers, Jack decided to stop offering this drivers to
the public.

Robert Riebisch
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page:  http://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead:  http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jim Hall]

> On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 14:58:30 -0500, Jerome Shidel wrote:
> >> Shouldn't take much.
> >
> > Correct, but if your going to calculate stuff, should be accurate.

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Mateusz Viste  wrote:
> Also, whoever would take on doing this semi-pointless task, should
> remember to take cluster size into account, since disk space occupied by
> an unpacked zip will be bigger (sometimes by much) than the sum of all
> its uncompressed bytes.
>

Rather than add code to compute how much space is needed to install
FreeDOS, wouldn't it be much easier to mention in the installer's
"welcome" screen (and in the documentation) that "Installing FreeDOS
Base requires __MB, and installing everything requires __MB"?

I'm confident users can easily figure out how much space they should
reserve to install FreeDOS.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Mateusz Viste]

On Tue, 07 Nov 2017 14:58:30 -0500, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>> Shouldn't take much.
> 
> Correct, but if your going to calculate stuff, should be accurate.

Also, whoever would take on doing this semi-pointless task, should 
remember to take cluster size into account, since disk space occupied by 
an unpacked zip will be bigger (sometimes by much) than the sum of all 
its uncompressed bytes.

Mateusz
-- 
FreeDOS is present on the USENET, too! alt.os.free-dos


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jerome Shidel]

>> On Nov 7, 2017, at 12:20 PM, Robert Riebisch  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Jerome,
>> 
>> I gave a lot of thought to the issue of “Installed” and “required” free 
>> space for the batch based FDI in FreeDOS 1.2. With the amount of additional 
>> overhead and complexity it would require, I decided it was not worth the 
>> effort at present. 
>> 
>> Base size,
>> Base + sources size,
>> Full size,
>> Full+ sources size,
>> All package sizes (custom advanced mode)
>> All packages + sources sizes,
> 
> Start with Base.

Can’t. If user is doing a custom install in advanced mode, not all of base may 
be included.

>> Temp storage requirements to expand largest installing package,
> 
> Difficult.
> 
>> Temp storage for custom install lists,
>> Temp storage for custom autoexec and config file creation,
> 
> Shouldn't take much.

Yes. But, everything counts.

> 
>> Size needed for copy style backup,
>> Size needed for advanced zip backup,
> 
> Means what?

Space required for the two different types of backups that FDI can create of a 
previous install.

No backup.
Simple xcopy to backup directory.
Archive Zip of prior install.

> 
>> Size needed for MBR backup,
>> Size needed for config file backup,
> 
> Shouldn't take much.

Correct, but if your going to calculate stuff, should be accurate.
> 
>> Size of packages to be removed and upgraded,
> 
> It's just "-", not "+" then. ;-)

Nope,

Prior package sizes are unknown. Would need to iterate through their file list 
and calculate how muck will be removed.

Let’s not forget about slack space either.

A 52byte file may use 512bytes on disk. So, just adding sizes is no good.

> 
>> a couple other minor things.
>> 
>> Basically, all of these would all need to be known and/or calculated before 
>> the installer could say “43.5mb of packages to install” requiring 87.2mb of 
>> free space.
> 
> Of course, uncompressed ZIP length should be calculated during ISO build
> at the latest, but not at runtime of the installer.

They already are. And are embedded in data files on the install Media.  
FDIMPLES uses that data in stand-alone mode to give a user a rough estimate of 
the installed size of a package.

> But what else is a computer for if not crunching numbers?
> 
> Robert Riebisch
> -- 
> +++ BTTR Software +++
>Home page:  http://www.bttr-software.de/
> DOS ain't dead:  http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi Jerome,

> I gave a lot of thought to the issue of “Installed” and “required” free space 
> for the batch based FDI in FreeDOS 1.2. With the amount of additional 
> overhead and complexity it would require, I decided it was not worth the 
> effort at present. 
> 
> Base size,
> Base + sources size,
> Full size,
> Full+ sources size,
> All package sizes (custom advanced mode)
> All packages + sources sizes,

Start with Base.

> Temp storage requirements to expand largest installing package,

Difficult.

> Temp storage for custom install lists,
> Temp storage for custom autoexec and config file creation,

Shouldn't take much.

> Size needed for copy style backup,
> Size needed for advanced zip backup,

Means what?

> Size needed for MBR backup,
> Size needed for config file backup,

Shouldn't take much.

> Size of packages to be removed and upgraded,

It's just "-", not "+" then. ;-)

> a couple other minor things.
> 
> Basically, all of these would all need to be known and/or calculated before 
> the installer could say “43.5mb of packages to install” requiring 87.2mb of 
> free space.

Of course, uncompressed ZIP length should be calculated during ISO build
at the latest, but not at runtime of the installer.

But what else is a computer for if not crunching numbers?

Robert Riebisch
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page:  http://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead:  http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jerome Shidel]

I gave a lot of thought to the issue of “Installed” and “required” free space 
for the batch based FDI in FreeDOS 1.2. With the amount of additional overhead 
and complexity it would require, I decided it was not worth the effort at 
present. 

Base size,
Base + sources size,
Full size,
Full+ sources size,
All package sizes (custom advanced mode)
All packages + sources sizes,
Temp storage requirements to expand largest installing package,
Temp storage for custom install lists,
Temp storage for custom autoexec and config file creation,
Size needed for copy style backup,
Size needed for advanced zip backup,
Size needed for MBR backup,
Size needed for config file backup,
Size of packages to be removed and upgraded,
a couple other minor things.

Basically, all of these would all need to be known and/or calculated before the 
installer could say “43.5mb of packages to install” requiring 87.2mb of free 
space.

Jerome




--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Robert Riebisch]

Hi,

> Don't take all this so serious. Please. I simply was caught by surprise 
> that the FreeDOS distribution was so big. And you know how it is, you 
> install something and when it asks you "Do you want this?" you say, 
> "Okay, why not?!?"

Last time I ran DOS or FreeDOS is years ago: Doesn't the installer say
in advance how much disk space it needs to install all selected packages?

Packages are basically ZIP files and for every file inside the archive
you can get its uncompressed (and compressed length). So whenever a
package has been changed (a 'make' utility comes to my mind) we could
run ('unzip -v foo.zip') and parse its output to an index file.
Then in the installer, sum it up for all selected packages, 'et voilà'...

Robert Riebisch
-- 
  +++ BTTR Software +++
 Home page:  http://www.bttr-software.de/
DOS ain't dead:  http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Dale E Sterner]

The guy produced PIXEL dos by recompiling it as a dos
program from a windows program as a demo. The demo
was so very good that I offered him $500 to do a full
dos version. He declined; said he doesn't do dos.
He had a full version at one time, destroyed it because
it was dos - not worth keeping.

DS




On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 17:06:49 -0600 Rugxulo  writes:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Dale E Sterner  
> wrote:
> >
> > You might list dos payfor software, a link to it, price ,
> > and user rating. If people get paid there might be more
> > activity in some types of sofware. I have a dos version
> > of PIXEL, looks just like windows. My copy is crippled
> > but I'd be happy to buy a full version if it every exists.
> > Put some money into the pot and people might start
> > writing high end stuff for dos which could make dos
> > more popular.
> 
> People won't pay. Even phone apps typically bottom out at $1 or $2
> because everyone expects them to be cheap or free. (Although most 
> apps
> aren't worth using anyways. Too buggy, too limited, not 
> well-supported
> on "older" devices.) And microtransactions (usually not necessary)
> also pollute the pool. It's like the "bad old days" when every 
> crappy
> util was shareware. We don't want to return to that. People are lazy
> and greedy. We don't want to shame those who gave away their work
> freely either. They will feel miffed if we suddenly decide to 
> endorse
> a few developers. (And let's be honest, most of us aren't exactly 
> rich
> anyways. There's only so much we can spare, and the cost of living 
> has
> gone up tremendously in recent years. Greed kills.)
> 
> Besides, nobody has the skills (anymore). The experts who used to
> program DOS have forgotten everything or "moved on" to more modern
> systems, where they can be lazy and not worry about 8.3 or limited 
> RAM
> or small stack or similar restrictions.
> 
> It's easy to say "money fixes everything", but it doesn't. Even with
> Free tools and Free OSes and working makefiles, even then they can't
> be bothered to support DOS/DJGPP/etc. Money won't change that. (And
> don't forget that "professional" developers demand dozens of dollars
> *per hour*! So don't expect a fully-developed, brand-new compiler 
> for
> $10.)
> 
> I'm not really trying to discourage anybody. You can *try*, but 
> don't
> get your hopes up! (And don't encourage bad behavior like 
> you-know-who
> driver dude, he's not worth one cent!).
> 
> (Money is just trash, and time is always limited. Sorry, I'm too
> cynical, it just doesn't work. We don't need laborious restrictions,
> even if we do gain one or two utils. Is it so hard for people to use
> Free tools? Apparently hard enough!)
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


We Say Good Bye To Sally Fields
iflperfecttouch.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5a00846f93cf546f7592st03duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Mateusz Viste]

On Mon, 06 Nov 2017 14:55:53 +0100, Tom Ehlert wrote:
> AND READ, competent programmers could have ported the kernel to GCC,
> with some time left to save the planet, and fight for peace on earth.

A competent programmer would NEVER fight for peace on earth. He would 
rather write a function fightfor() that would take a 'planet' variable as 
argument. The function would be possibly extended to support other types 
of celestial objects, too.

Mateusz
-- 
FreeDOS is present on the USENET, too! alt.os.free-dos


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Tom Ehlert]

during the time that all the contributions in this thread were
written AND READ, competent programmers could have ported the kernel
to GCC, with some time left to save the planet, and fight for peace on
earth.

just my 2 cents.

Tom


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Tom Ehlert]

during the time that all these responses were written AND READ, competent
programmers could


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Dale E Sterner  wrote:
>
> You might list dos payfor software, a link to it, price ,
> and user rating. If people get paid there might be more
> activity in some types of sofware. I have a dos version
> of PIXEL, looks just like windows. My copy is crippled
> but I'd be happy to buy a full version if it every exists.
> Put some money into the pot and people might start
> writing high end stuff for dos which could make dos
> more popular.

People won't pay. Even phone apps typically bottom out at $1 or $2
because everyone expects them to be cheap or free. (Although most apps
aren't worth using anyways. Too buggy, too limited, not well-supported
on "older" devices.) And microtransactions (usually not necessary)
also pollute the pool. It's like the "bad old days" when every crappy
util was shareware. We don't want to return to that. People are lazy
and greedy. We don't want to shame those who gave away their work
freely either. They will feel miffed if we suddenly decide to endorse
a few developers. (And let's be honest, most of us aren't exactly rich
anyways. There's only so much we can spare, and the cost of living has
gone up tremendously in recent years. Greed kills.)

Besides, nobody has the skills (anymore). The experts who used to
program DOS have forgotten everything or "moved on" to more modern
systems, where they can be lazy and not worry about 8.3 or limited RAM
or small stack or similar restrictions.

It's easy to say "money fixes everything", but it doesn't. Even with
Free tools and Free OSes and working makefiles, even then they can't
be bothered to support DOS/DJGPP/etc. Money won't change that. (And
don't forget that "professional" developers demand dozens of dollars
*per hour*! So don't expect a fully-developed, brand-new compiler for
$10.)

I'm not really trying to discourage anybody. You can *try*, but don't
get your hopes up! (And don't encourage bad behavior like you-know-who
driver dude, he's not worth one cent!).

(Money is just trash, and time is always limited. Sorry, I'm too
cynical, it just doesn't work. We don't need laborious restrictions,
even if we do gain one or two utils. Is it so hard for people to use
Free tools? Apparently hard enough!)

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Jim Hall  wrote:
>
> I helped JP Software with the source code release to 4DOS, and the
> license was my greatest mistake in open source software.
>
> In retrospect, I should have stuck to my original suggestion to use the GNU 
> GPL.

You can always ask upstream to relicense. It's happened before (for
other projects):

http://freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/freeing_an_old_game_moria/

BTW, I like the features 4DOS but never heavily used it. Honestly, I
prefer vanilla shell features (COMMAND.COM) that are
(pseudo-)"portable", supplementing that with various utils as needed
(e.g. sed).

Besides Lucho, there haven't been any noticeable contributors to 4DOS
anyways, mainly due to heavy reliance on non-Free tools. Very hard but
(in theory) not impossible to fix (and sadly an all-too-common problem
for old legacy DOS software). Seriously, DOS developers just never
cared enough to fix things like that, sadly. We really need to
encourage Free tools for future work.

Honestly, we don't need 4DOS, we have FreeCOM, which (IMO) is plenty
good enough. Granted, if somebody cleaned up 4DOS (or even FreeCOM!),
that'd be great, but apparently that's expecting too much.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 10:58 AM,   wrote:
>
> svarog386 is a good idea, but I would prefer to install the official FreeDOS
> distro and than add software from something like deb-multimedia in the
> Debian world. Again, the keyword is trust.

The FSF won't even link to us because we link to proprietary software.
Granted, they aren't exactly huge contributors to DOS (or DJGPP)
overall. But keep in mind that FreeDOS is the only active DOS left
(all other proprietaries died), and certainly the only Free(ish) one.
We're not perfect, but I do have hope that we can improve. I don't
want to intentionally give anyone a reason to not use FreeDOS,
especially not for something as dumb as licensing (which, IMO, is not
worth locking down on a non-commercial system).

> How I see it, resources are quite limited. If someone was to add a
> freeware/shareware/demo repository and is backed by the developers and the
> community, the trust part is quite easy to accomplish. People would submit
> their wishes or even completed packages, someone would look if it's okay (no
> viruses or other harmful code, the original binaries used etc.) and it would
> be added to the non-free repository.

How would you find viruses in closed source?? You can scan, but that
often gives false positives (or maybe false negatives). There is
little "trust" there. But outside of reproducible builds (which are
very hard, especially for us), there's no great way to improve that.

> This way, everyone would be satisfied. Including those who wish to use Jacks
> stuff, as UMBPCI, XMGR and UHDD could be part of this non-free repo.

Ugh. Again, I have to ask, have you actually *tried* his drivers on
FreeDOS proper? He has (sometimes) made OEM 0xFD blacklists, so it
possibly won't run here at all. Which begs the question why anyone
would recommend it to us (or why he wastes our time, again). This is
publicly documented on *his own website*! Now, maybe he removed it
(again) and it works (temporarily), I don't know! But I'm not going to
ask, and I'm not going to grovel. He clearly isn't trying to be very
helpful to us. Everything he has done has been destructive, so I don't
want any part of it. I wouldn't trust his proprietary binaries at all.
Even his open source ones were buggy crap, which he refused to
acknowledge (and blamed me falsely instead). Sorry, not sorry.

BTW, his proprietary drivers are *non-redistributable*, so you're
absolutely wrong if you think he'd let us share them with anyone. Why
do you think he makes you email him privately to get them? He
explicitly doesn't want them redistributed! So again, horrible
suggestion. Nobody can legally share his drivers without his
permission, which he isn't willing to give. (Good riddance!) Do you
not understand this? He gets *zero* benefit from being closed, plus
his whole excuse is bogus. It's not worth kissing his ass, he doesn't
deserve the praise.

"Just use Linux [DOSEMU2] !!"

> I know, this is just a theory and I'm not really contributing much at this
> time. But believe me, if I use something, I will be part of it. A small
> part, but a part. Hopefully this time will start soon. (I'm talking about my
> project to finally install FreeDOS alongside DR DOS on my vintage 486. I
> might additionally also start using FreeDOS on a P4 I have sitting around
> and waiting for something to do...)

Buy a cheap USB jump drive, and install to that (via RUFUS or
whatever). It's easy and convenient.

> To all the devs: thanks for your continued effort. FreeDOS is something
> worth keeping active, if only as a spare time project.
> To the community: thanks for continued activity on the mailing list. I love
> to read it.

I love FreeDOS, but it's almost a lost cause. Very few can agree on
anything, and all the important work takes a lot of time. We need more
sane volunteers (and not rehashed, buggy drivers constantly announced
every week!!!). But all the new development in the world focuses on
Windows, Mac, or Linux (which frankly don't need any more developers).
So even old makefiles and projects that used to support DJGPP or DOS
or whatever don't work anymore. It's very frustrating. We're fighting
a losing battle, all we can do is try to stop the bleeding. AMD64 and
UEFI didn't help, but VMs (and VT-X) finally did. So it's not totally
impossible, thankfully.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

There are already several replies to this which I haven't read yet. So
I might be missing or repeating something. But I'm going to reply
anyways.


On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 9:48 AM,   wrote:
>
> I understand that the development of FreeDOS needs to be free as in freedom
> as in open source. It makes sense.

At minimum, you need a free "BASE". If you can't even download
(redistribute) the bare minimum to get running, it's almost worthless.
Of course, being able to use, study, and modify also greatly helps in
fixing bugs and adding new features, optimizations, flexibility, etc.

> BUT I also understand that sometimes open source is not possible. I come
> from Linux and I use Debian. It is a the distribution devoted to freedom and
> open source, but it doesn't just work. On many systems it needs a lot of
> help to even get going in the first place.

Ironic considering FSF calls Debian "non-free" for recommending and
including binary blobs, among other things. I know they are "mostly"
Free, but most isn't enough to FSF.

So just by pointing to non-free software, that pisses the FSF off.
And, in fairness, if we have Free tools, why are we forcibly
(exclusively) relying on others? The FSF, GNU, et al. have contributed
more than others to Free software, freely given to all, so I don't
understand our reluctance to do so.

I understand that not everyone is a programmer, but overall it's best
not to rely on proprietary software if you have a choice. It's just
too locked down, too hard to find, only works on select versions of
OSes, etc.

> What I'm saying is that you might consider allowing additional software,
> either in the main distribution, or - which would be even better: to allow
> the addition of easy to set-up additional repositories, so that users can
> easily get freeware that is closed source, or even shareware. Anything that
> has a license allowing redistribution.

Which is not TurboC or Turbo Pascal, for instance. And many other
things disallow redistribution (mostly for non-existing reasons). It
makes no sense to me, but you can't argue with a brick wall.

> This way the main FreeDOS distribution stays open and free (as in freedom),
> while allowing the user to add freeware/shareware etc. by utilizing the main
> free distribution.

At some point it's pointless to try to be Free if everything else is
locked down. Even FSF has a hard time finding machines with Free
BIOSes, no firmware binary blobs, etc. This needs to get better, not
worse. Some of it is lack of time, but a lot of it is just irrational
stubbornness upstream. There's no reason to keep exclusive control if
it gives you zero practical advantage (besides ego, which is useless).
You shouldn't punish end users or make their lives harder just for
vain reasons.

> I also use Gentoo Linux. On Gentoo there are some ebuilds (the package files
> for the package manager, which is called portage) that will install even
> proprietory software, keeping it a part of the Gentoo package system.

Proprietary is probably not going away, but let's not encourage people
to be locked down and shackled by horrible licenses. It's more than a
little inconvenient, it makes getting things done harder than it
should be.

> From a users point of view this is encouraged and highly appreciated.
>
> Again, I completely get it that the main FreeDOS operating system and system
> software such as drivers and utilities should be free and open.

We have a lot of excellent Free development tools, so we need more
programmers. Any new work should focus on freedom (and optionally
selling software as a service, if needed). We don't need more hurdles
making things inconvenient for us. I know we don't have Free solutions
to literally everything, but we shouldn't encourage laziness if we can
actively fix or avoid the problem in the first place.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Dale E Sterner]

You might list dos payfor software, a link to it, price ,
and user rating. If people get paid there might be more
activity in some types of sofware. I have a dos version
of PIXEL, looks just like windows. My copy is crippled
but I'd be happy to buy a full version if it every exists.
Put some money into the pot and people might start
writing high end stuff for dos which could make dos
more popular.


cheers
DS



On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 15:46:46 -0600 Jim Hall  writes:
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 9:48 AM,   wrote:
> > What I'm saying is that you might consider allowing additional 
> software,
> > either in the main distribution, or - which would be even better: 
> to allow
> > the addition of easy to set-up additional repositories, so that 
> users can
> > easily get freeware that is closed source, or even shareware. 
> Anything that
> > has a license allowing redistribution.
> > This way the main FreeDOS distribution stays open and free (as in 
> freedom),
> > while allowing the user to add freeware/shareware etc. by 
> utilizing the main
> > free distribution.
> 
> The rest of your email was about alt distributions with nonfree
> packages, but I'll comment here:
> 
> FreeDOS is very unusual in the "DOS" world by having a 
> "distribution"
> and "packages." (We made FreeDOS this way to be more modular, thus
> easier to modify - but also to appeal to a modern audience who is 
> more
> familiar with Linux.) In every other version of DOS, going back to
> MS-DOS and PC-DOS, you installed DOS from a few floppy disks. To
> install other software, you either bought it from a store or
> downloaded it from a BBS, and installing the other software was
> either:
> 
> 1. run the INSTALL or SETUP program, and follow the prompts
> 
> 2. unzip (or unarc, or whatever) the archive file into a directory
> 
> 
> If you have nonfree DOS applications (such as legacy "abandoned"
> commercial software, or classic shareware, or some new program) you
> install them easily enough using either of the above.
> 
> In that way, "the main FreeDOS distribution stays open and free (as 
> in
> freedom), while allowing the user to add freeware/shareware etc."
> 
>
-
-
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> 


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


We Say Good Bye To Sally Fields
iflperfecttouch.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/59ff8d56c7e94d565391st02duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jim Hall]

>> On Sat, 4 Nov 2017, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:
>>> Isn't that exactly what JPSoftware did with 4DOS?
>>> And speaking of it, 4DOS isn't free - it is specifically restricted to
>>> FreeDOS, which makes it non-free.
>>>

> On 2017-11-05 01:48, geneb wrote:
>> Which is basically nonsense because the person that released the software
>> specifically states that, "I don't have any problems with people using it on
>> those OS's (although I'd be surprised if there was a lot of MS-DOS or PC-DOS
>> action left). That license was written by the FreeDOS people . it was
>> probably worded that way because it's impossible to list every possible
>> variation of the DOS OS's."

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 5:52 AM,   wrote:
> Agreed. So this makes it implicit that you can use 4DOS on any other DOS (or
> DOS emulator/environment) you like. Still, the license is what probably
> holds in court. Not that anyone would be intrerested


I helped JP Software with the source code release to 4DOS, and the
license was my greatest mistake in open source software. JP planned to
continue selling 4NT (now TakeCommand), which was based on 4DOS, and
didn't want to compete with a forked open source version of 4DOS
running on NT. I suggested they might include a term that limited the
portability of the code. They interpreted that as "only on FreeDOS."
That made 4DOS nonfree software, and I've regretted it ever since.

In retrospect, I should have stuck to my original suggestion to use the GNU GPL.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jim Hall]

On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 9:48 AM,   wrote:
> What I'm saying is that you might consider allowing additional software,
> either in the main distribution, or - which would be even better: to allow
> the addition of easy to set-up additional repositories, so that users can
> easily get freeware that is closed source, or even shareware. Anything that
> has a license allowing redistribution.
> This way the main FreeDOS distribution stays open and free (as in freedom),
> while allowing the user to add freeware/shareware etc. by utilizing the main
> free distribution.

The rest of your email was about alt distributions with nonfree
packages, but I'll comment here:

FreeDOS is very unusual in the "DOS" world by having a "distribution"
and "packages." (We made FreeDOS this way to be more modular, thus
easier to modify - but also to appeal to a modern audience who is more
familiar with Linux.) In every other version of DOS, going back to
MS-DOS and PC-DOS, you installed DOS from a few floppy disks. To
install other software, you either bought it from a store or
downloaded it from a BBS, and installing the other software was
either:

1. run the INSTALL or SETUP program, and follow the prompts

2. unzip (or unarc, or whatever) the archive file into a directory


If you have nonfree DOS applications (such as legacy "abandoned"
commercial software, or classic shareware, or some new program) you
install them easily enough using either of the above.

In that way, "the main FreeDOS distribution stays open and free (as in
freedom), while allowing the user to add freeware/shareware etc."

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

On 2017-11-05 19:32, Mateusz Viste wrote:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2017 17:58:54 +0100, userbeitrag wrote:

The truth is I don't have the time nor the resources. Sorry.

For someone with no time you sure write awfully long mails. Might be time
better spent doing actual stuff.


I type fast... ;-) But, yeah, you've got a point...


svarog386 is a good idea, but I would prefer to install the official
FreeDOS distro and than add software from something like deb-multimedia
in the Debian world. Again, the keyword is trust.

I'm sorry to insist... But that ain't gonna happen. I am willing to add
non-free packages (that you would contribute) to Svarog386. I can also
provide you with pointers about how to create your own repository. I
don't think you'll get any better options here.


Like I said, ain't gonna happen either. The two reasons are 1) time and 
2) my internet connection is way too slow - it could hold only a local 
repo. Sorry.

But maybe I will add packages to svarog386 then. Let's see.


If someone was to (...) People would (...) someone would look if (...)

We're not living in wonderland, sorry. If you don't do stuff that you'd
like to see happen yourself, then it's unlikely "someone" will do it for
you. That being said, Svarog386 is already out there, has multiple
repositories and awaits only for package contributions. Note that
Svarog386 repositories can just as well be used from within a vanilla
FreeDOS system.


In that case I'll try svarog386. I've had the impression it was a 
complete distribution. Thanks for clarifying.



OT: Do you think your package manager could be installed on DR DOS as
well?

http://fdnpkg.sourceforge.net says:
"It is written by Mateusz Viste primarily for the FreeDOS™ project, but
can be used with other DOS systems as well."

Mateusz


Thanks.

Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Mateusz Viste]

On Sun, 05 Nov 2017 17:58:54 +0100, userbeitrag wrote:
> The truth is I don't have the time nor the resources. Sorry.

For someone with no time you sure write awfully long mails. Might be time 
better spent doing actual stuff.

> svarog386 is a good idea, but I would prefer to install the official
> FreeDOS distro and than add software from something like deb-multimedia
> in the Debian world. Again, the keyword is trust.

I'm sorry to insist... But that ain't gonna happen. I am willing to add 
non-free packages (that you would contribute) to Svarog386. I can also 
provide you with pointers about how to create your own repository. I 
don't think you'll get any better options here.

> If someone was to (...) People would (...) someone would look if (...)

We're not living in wonderland, sorry. If you don't do stuff that you'd 
like to see happen yourself, then it's unlikely "someone" will do it for 
you. That being said, Svarog386 is already out there, has multiple 
repositories and awaits only for package contributions. Note that 
Svarog386 repositories can just as well be used from within a vanilla 
FreeDOS system.

> OT: Do you think your package manager could be installed on DR DOS as
> well?

http://fdnpkg.sourceforge.net says:
"It is written by Mateusz Viste primarily for the FreeDOS™ project, but 
can be used with other DOS systems as well."

Mateusz
-- 
FreeDOS is present on the USENET, too! alt.os.free-dos


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

Am 2017-11-05 um 16:55 schrieb Mateusz Viste:

On Sun, 05 Nov 2017 16:48:00 +0100, userbeitrag wrote:

What I'm saying is that you might consider allowing additional software,
either in the main distribution, or - which would be even better: to
allow the addition of easy to set-up additional repositories

This has been possible for years already. FDNPKG, the current FreeDOS
packages manager supports multiple repositories. When I developed it, I
had in mind that people might start their own (free, non-free, shareware,
whatever) repositories to complement the official (FOSS only) FreeDOS
repos. So far, I am not aware of anyone having done that. Are you willing
to start your own repository? It won't be included in FreeDOS, but FreeDOS
people will be able to use it by adding a single configuration line to
their setups.

Alternatively, you might also consider submitting (non-free) packages to
svarog386.

Mateusz


Yes, I would be willing. But you wouldn't be happy with me. Let me first 
set up the 486 system with FreeDOS, a project I am working on for more 
than a year now.



The truth is I don't have the time nor the resources. Sorry.

svarog386 is a good idea, but I would prefer to install the official 
FreeDOS distro and than add software from something like deb-multimedia 
in the Debian world. Again, the keyword is trust.


How I see it, resources are quite limited. If someone was to add a 
freeware/shareware/demo repository and is backed by the developers and 
the community, the trust part is quite easy to accomplish. People would 
submit their wishes or even completed packages, someone would look if 
it's okay (no viruses or other harmful code, the original binaries used 
etc.) and it would be added to the non-free repository.


This way, everyone would be satisfied. Including those who wish to use 
Jacks stuff, as UMBPCI, XMGR and UHDD could be part of this non-free repo.


I know, this is just a theory and I'm not really contributing much at 
this time. But believe me, if I use something, I will be part of it. A 
small part, but a part. Hopefully this time will start soon. (I'm 
talking about my project to finally install FreeDOS alongside DR DOS on 
my vintage 486. I might additionally also start using FreeDOS on a P4 I 
have sitting around and waiting for something to do...)


BTW, thanks for the package manager! I didn't know who developed what, 
but a package manager is a huge leap forward for FreeDOS.


OT: Do you think your package manager could be installed on DR DOS as well?

To all the devs: thanks for your continued effort. FreeDOS is something 
worth keeping active, if only as a spare time project.
To the community: thanks for continued activity on the mailing list. I 
love to read it.


Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Mateusz Viste]

On Sun, 05 Nov 2017 16:48:00 +0100, userbeitrag wrote:
> What I'm saying is that you might consider allowing additional software,
> either in the main distribution, or - which would be even better: to
> allow the addition of easy to set-up additional repositories

This has been possible for years already. FDNPKG, the current FreeDOS 
packages manager supports multiple repositories. When I developed it, I 
had in mind that people might start their own (free, non-free, shareware, 
whatever) repositories to complement the official (FOSS only) FreeDOS 
repos. So far, I am not aware of anyone having done that. Are you willing 
to start your own repository? It won't be included in FreeDOS, but FreeDOS 
people will be able to use it by adding a single configuration line to 
their setups.

Alternatively, you might also consider submitting (non-free) packages to 
svarog386.

Mateusz
-- 
FreeDOS is present on the USENET, too! alt.os.free-dos


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

Hi!

On 2017-11-05 00:48, Jim Hall wrote:

On Sat, 04 Nov 2017 20:09:48 +0100, userbeitrag wrote:

I'm also thinking that FreeDOS should include a not-so-free and even a
non-free section of software. The only limit should be restriction of
redistribution.


On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Mateusz Viste  wrote:

I'm afraid this is contrary to the FreeDOS spirit. [..]


To epxand on Mateusz a little bit:

FreeDOS exists today because it is open source software. Anyone can
fix a bug in FreeDOS, or add a new feature, or just study the source
code to see how it works.

We wouldn't have FreeDOS in 2017 if we had made it all closed source.
If everything was closed source, then anytime a new user wanted to
make a program do something extra, they'd have to rewrite the entire
thing. That doesn't help anyone.

While we recognize that the vast majority of people use FreeDOS to run
classic/legacy DOS programs, which are themselves closed source, we
want to make sure that the FreeDOS kernel and all the things that make
it "FreeDOS" remain Free / open source software. We have no interest
in bundling "non-free" software in FreeDOS.


Jim


I understand that the development of FreeDOS needs to be free as in 
freedom as in open source. It makes sense.


BUT I also understand that sometimes open source is not possible. I come 
from Linux and I use Debian. It is a the distribution devoted to freedom 
and open source, but it doesn't just work. On many systems it needs a 
lot of help to even get going in the first place.


What I'm saying is that you might consider allowing additional software, 
either in the main distribution, or - which would be even better: to 
allow the addition of easy to set-up additional repositories, so that 
users can easily get freeware that is closed source, or even shareware. 
Anything that has a license allowing redistribution.
This way the main FreeDOS distribution stays open and free (as in 
freedom), while allowing the user to add freeware/shareware etc. by 
utilizing the main free distribution.


Thus it is not about FreeDOS - it is about a distribution of software. 
And about a chain of trust. I do trust the FreeDOS distribution, but an 
alternate distribution? Who makes it? What else is different in the 
distribution? Allowing to use the official FreeDOS and adding certain 
software from a easy to use repostory makes it easier to verify the 
source, since now I only have to check the additional stuff, not the 
whole distribution for trustworthyness.


I also use Gentoo Linux. On Gentoo there are some ebuilds (the package 
files for the package manager, which is called portage) that will 
install even proprietory software, keeping it a part of the Gentoo 
package system.


From a users point of view this is encouraged and highly appreciated.

Again, I completely get it that the main FreeDOS operating system and 
system software such as drivers and utilities should be free and open.


Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

On 2017-11-05 01:48, geneb wrote:

On Sat, 4 Nov 2017, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:


Isn't that exactly what JPSoftware did with 4DOS?
And speaking of it, 4DOS isn't free - it is specifically restricted 
to FreeDOS, which makes it non-free.


Which is basically nonsense because the person that released the 
software specifically states that, "I don't have any problems with 
people using it on those OS's (although I'd be surprised if there was 
a lot of MS-DOS or PC-DOS action left). That license was written by 
the FreeDOS people . it was probably worded that way because it's 
impossible to list every possible variation of the DOS OS's."


g.

Agreed. So this makes it implicit that you can use 4DOS on any other DOS 
(or DOS emulator/environment) you like. Still, the license is what 
probably holds in court. Not that anyone would be intrerested


Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

(I feel like I'm turning into Linus Torvalds. Apologies to him for the
comparison.)

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Eric Auer  wrote:
>
> if umbpci and xmgr run more stable than jemm386, in particular
> regarding umb range autodetection, then it is no surprise that
> Dimitris is happy about those :-)

Please don't recommend broken software. I'm still waiting on
confirmation that the "drivers" work at all on FreeDOS. There's
absolutely no reason to mention them here if they won't even run
because he's (yet again) blacklisted OEM 0xFD in his binaries.
Seriously, anybody here willing to defend him, please actually try to
run his latest "drivers" before giving him the benefit of the doubt.

DOS users are *very* bad about not reporting bugs and regressions. I
long ago asked, several times, for other people to test his buggy
Mar-18-2015 "drivers", but no one ever did. That is not acceptable,
especially considering that is the straw that broke the camel's back.

I know a lot of DOS software isn't actively maintained. I know we
don't answer and fix every bug. It's a lot of work, quite honestly! We
can't do literally everything. But refusing to report bugs is "bad"
because no one can fix it if they don't know about it.

Again, constantly reminding us about "new" drivers (that *may* not
even run on FreeDOS proper) is insane.

> And you remember how long ago Japheth stopped maintenance and support for 
> jemm386

Except for JLOAD (and *.JLM), I think JEMM386 is "open source".
Apparently it uses OpenWatcom's Wmake and Wlink and JWasm. (Artistic
v1 and/or GPLv2 ?? But, AFAIK, all of Japheth's additions were public
domain.)

> Of course it would still be very nice to
> have simultaneously nice AND open source drivers...

We do have "open source" drivers. It's called GNU/Linux, FreeBSD (or
maybe OpenBSD, who refuses NDAs), Haiku, Minix, etc. All of those are
better. It's not worth chasing around permission from a disgruntled
ex-contributor. His work is not unique in such a big world. Patience
is not free either.

Having said that, you mention UMBPCI like it's mandatory. I don't use
that or even EMM386. I don't need more UMBs free. I get plenty free on
my "XMS only" FreeDOS setup. And HIMEMX works just fine, thank you. We
also have FDXXMS. Heck, we also have (2015-era) XMGR. What does (new?)
XMGR offer that 2015 didn't? Probably literally nothing. (Feel free to
correct me, but I don't think you will.)

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[geneb]

On Sat, 4 Nov 2017, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:


Isn't that exactly what JPSoftware did with 4DOS?
And speaking of it, 4DOS isn't free - it is specifically restricted to 
FreeDOS, which makes it non-free.


Which is basically nonsense because the person that released the software 
specifically states that, "I don't have any problems with people using it 
on those OS's (although I'd be surprised if there was a lot of MS-DOS or 
PC-DOS action left). That license was written by the FreeDOS people . it 
was probably worded that way because it's impossible to list every 
possible variation of the DOS OS's."


g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jim Hall]

> On Sat, 04 Nov 2017 20:09:48 +0100, userbeitrag wrote:
>> I'm also thinking that FreeDOS should include a not-so-free and even a
>> non-free section of software. The only limit should be restriction of
>> redistribution.


On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Mateusz Viste  wrote:
> I'm afraid this is contrary to the FreeDOS spirit. [..]


To epxand on Mateusz a little bit:

FreeDOS exists today because it is open source software. Anyone can
fix a bug in FreeDOS, or add a new feature, or just study the source
code to see how it works.

We wouldn't have FreeDOS in 2017 if we had made it all closed source.
If everything was closed source, then anytime a new user wanted to
make a program do something extra, they'd have to rewrite the entire
thing. That doesn't help anyone.

While we recognize that the vast majority of people use FreeDOS to run
classic/legacy DOS programs, which are themselves closed source, we
want to make sure that the FreeDOS kernel and all the things that make
it "FreeDOS" remain Free / open source software. We have no interest
in bundling "non-free" software in FreeDOS.


Jim

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Jim Hall]

> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Dimitris Zilaskos  wrote:
> > the wishes of the owners of the respective intellectual property have to be 
> > respected.

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 1:58 AM, Rugxulo  wrote:
> Just because a disgruntled developer is angry (unfairly, I might add)
> doesn't give him the right to rescind pre-existing licenses or do
> whatever irrational thing he wants.
>[..]

For anyone relatively new to the FreeDOS email lists, Jack's drivers
come up every once in a while. Jack writes good code, but he tends to
get very upset very quickly, and then lashes out at people. He has
brought a lot of ill will here. It's no surprise that Jack keeps
adding notices in his software "license" that says you cannot use his
program on or with FreeDOS.

> Sigh. I don't want to bring all this up, but some people (even
> geniuses whom I respect, like Eric Auer) can't seem to let go. And
> that's another thing I don't understand, but I don't want to get into
> all of "that" either! Ugh.

Yes, I wish we could go our separate ways. Eric sometimes likes to
"advertise" some of the stuff Jack is doing elsewhere. It always
generates a lot of unhelpful noise.

Until Jack re-releases his programs under an open source software
license, I remain uninterested in the things he is doing. I wish him
the best, but closed source DOS doesn't interest me.

Jim

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Ralf Quint]

On 11/4/2017 2:01 PM, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:
>
> Well, I don't remember the exact partitioning, but I think that 40 MB
> for each DOS and the rest for Linux was what I could have done. And I
> also repartitioned for a bigger FreeDOS, but then work came along.
>
> To take your car example: I got an SUV alright, but I invited too many
> friends to bring along.
>
> I assume the full 512 MB will surely be enough for FreeDOS. But I
> definitely also want to install DR DOS. I think I might drop Linux...
>
> BTW, the PC is vintage and I think that 512 MB is as much as I can get
> out of the BIOS setup anyhow. I had to manually calculate C/H/S, which
> is 993/16/63.
>
> Also, the CMOS battery is dead, so for the time being I have to
> manually enter these values everytime I try to boot this vintage PC. I
> don't have access to a working 3.5 inch floppy right now and I also
> cannot add a CD-ROM drive. Also, when I installed DOS on a LBA-capable
> system, it didn't boot on the 486 PC. I think this is a LBA versus
> C/H/S issue.
>
> But remember, this was just a hobby that I tried to get working during
> Christmas vacation time. No time now. Though I'm planning to pick up
> at some point.
>
>
> Hope that explains it. Don't get to angry with me. Thanks. 
Well, I am not getting angry, I just sometimes question the logic that
people put forward in order to install things. On a 40MB hard drive,
back in the days, you would run into space issues to install full DOS
plus GEM plus other used programs as well.
The reason why "CD" distribution of FreeDOS is so big because too many
people that never worked on DOS "back in the days" always want to
install the whole shebang, as that is what they end up having to do on
other systems as well. Even Linux these days comes with most
distributions as 64bit only and barely fits even on a DVD anymore.

And trying to use some old hardware that has a tons of issues, well,
that's when you get yourself willingly into a world of hurt.

But then this is still not quite on topic of the subject of this thread...

'nen schönen Tag noch... ;-)

Ralf


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Gregg Eshelman via Freedos-user]

512 meg? Luxury! My first hard drive was FIVE megabytes. A full height 5.25" 
MFM made by Tandon. I installed MS-DOS (3.1 IIRC) and all the software I had, 
mostly games. It was *half full*! Then I backed it up, onto 360K floppies. By 
the time I put the last disk on the stack, I was thinking "Never again.". Disks 
cost too much to tie up like that.
 

On Saturday, November 4, 2017, 3:02:12 PM MDT,  
wrote:  
The HDD actually isn't that small: it's a 512 MB Transcend 40-pin IDE 
flash module.  --
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

On 2017-11-04 21:47, Eric Auer wrote:

Hi Rugxulo,

if umbpci and xmgr run more stable than jemm386, in particular
regarding umb range autodetection, then it is no surprise that
Dimitris is happy about those :-) And you remember how long
ago Japheth stopped maintenance and support for jemm386 and
how hard it is to improve memory drivers (see broken Pemberton
patch for HIMEMX...) Of course it would still be very nice to
have simultaneously nice AND open source drivers...

Cheers, Eric


It doesn't help if his license specifically excludes FreeDOS. Keeping 
the older version is the way to go then. IMHO key is to include all 
possibilities and have them documented on FreeDOS installation, so the 
user can try out all those possibilities. The one that is stable will be 
kept - when it is unstable, the user has to switch to another EMM setup.


Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

On 2017-11-04 21:23, Ralf Quint wrote:

On 11/4/2017 12:06 PM, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:

I did install a couple of software too. What good is DOS without
programs, right? But even deselecting the compilers and the GUI it
didn't fit. I wanted to select only really relevant packages next, but
work called and I had to stop the project for the time. As soon as I
find the time, I will continue to try.

Yes, I know that DOS fits a floppy! That DOS isn't of any use though -
you need at least one program.
Also, a lot of what the FreeDOS distribution offers are utilities,
meaning: they also don't do anything for you except if you have other
data/programs. Take ZIP as an example: without something to ZIP it's
just sitting there waiting. No one would say: "I have to work with ZIP
today to get my work done" or "I want to play with ZIP the whole day,
because it's so much fun".

Sorry for being sarcastic. It's my nature. I appologize in advance.

So much for the story of a total fail...

Well, how small was that hard drive that you tried? Of course, if you
select "everything plus the kitchen sink", you can expect to fill up a
(very) small hard drive. But this is not a failure of installing
FreeDOS, it is a failure to apply common sense. And a GUI is not part of
DOS, and why would you need ALL compilers? (which ones did you want to use?)

Your story is a bit like buying a Fiat 500 and than complain that you
can't fit in a couple tons of bricks...

Ralf


Hi Ralf!

Don't take all this so serious. Please. I simply was caught by surprise 
that the FreeDOS distribution was so big. And you know how it is, you 
install something and when it asks you "Do you want this?" you say, 
"Okay, why not?!?"


The GUI I'm talking about is OpenGEM. I always wanted to try out GEM, so 
I figured I'd include it.


The compilers I didn't even select. I *de*selected them.

The HDD actually isn't that small: it's a 512 MB Transcend 40-pin IDE 
flash module. I partitioned it so that it would hold not only a FreeDOS 
partition, but also a DR DOS 5.0 partition and a Linux partition.


I remembered my first DOS machine had a 40 MB HDD. So I partitioned too 
small. The Linux would only be an experiment, the DR DOS would be a 
restoration of the original operating system and the FreeDOS would be an 
experiment to see how it works on real hardware.


Well, I don't remember the exact partitioning, but I think that 40 MB 
for each DOS and the rest for Linux was what I could have done. And I 
also repartitioned for a bigger FreeDOS, but then work came along.


To take your car example: I got an SUV alright, but I invited too many 
friends to bring along.


I assume the full 512 MB will surely be enough for FreeDOS. But I 
definitely also want to install DR DOS. I think I might drop Linux...


BTW, the PC is vintage and I think that 512 MB is as much as I can get 
out of the BIOS setup anyhow. I had to manually calculate C/H/S, which 
is 993/16/63.


Also, the CMOS battery is dead, so for the time being I have to manually 
enter these values everytime I try to boot this vintage PC. I don't have 
access to a working 3.5 inch floppy right now and I also cannot add a 
CD-ROM drive. Also, when I installed DOS on a LBA-capable system, it 
didn't boot on the 486 PC. I think this is a LBA versus C/H/S issue.


But remember, this was just a hobby that I tried to get working during 
Christmas vacation time. No time now. Though I'm planning to pick up at 
some point.



Hope that explains it. Don't get to angry with me. Thanks.
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Eric Auer]

Hi Rugxulo,

if umbpci and xmgr run more stable than jemm386, in particular
regarding umb range autodetection, then it is no surprise that
Dimitris is happy about those :-) And you remember how long
ago Japheth stopped maintenance and support for jemm386 and
how hard it is to improve memory drivers (see broken Pemberton
patch for HIMEMX...) Of course it would still be very nice to
have simultaneously nice AND open source drivers...

Cheers, Eric


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Ralf Quint]

On 11/4/2017 12:06 PM, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:
>
> I did install a couple of software too. What good is DOS without
> programs, right? But even deselecting the compilers and the GUI it
> didn't fit. I wanted to select only really relevant packages next, but
> work called and I had to stop the project for the time. As soon as I
> find the time, I will continue to try.
>
> Yes, I know that DOS fits a floppy! That DOS isn't of any use though -
> you need at least one program.
> Also, a lot of what the FreeDOS distribution offers are utilities,
> meaning: they also don't do anything for you except if you have other
> data/programs. Take ZIP as an example: without something to ZIP it's
> just sitting there waiting. No one would say: "I have to work with ZIP
> today to get my work done" or "I want to play with ZIP the whole day,
> because it's so much fun".
>
> Sorry for being sarcastic. It's my nature. I appologize in advance.
>
> So much for the story of a total fail... 
Well, how small was that hard drive that you tried? Of course, if you
select "everything plus the kitchen sink", you can expect to fill up a
(very) small hard drive. But this is not a failure of installing
FreeDOS, it is a failure to apply common sense. And a GUI is not part of
DOS, and why would you need ALL compilers? (which ones did you want to use?)

Your story is a bit like buying a Fiat 500 and than complain that you
can't fit in a couple tons of bricks...

Ralf


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Mateusz Viste]

On Sat, 04 Nov 2017 20:09:48 +0100, userbeitrag wrote:
> I'm also thinking that FreeDOS should include a not-so-free and even a
> non-free section of software. The only limit should be restriction of
> redistribution.

I'm afraid this is contrary to the FreeDOS spirit. That being said, there 
is at least one alternative distribution that has a more flexible 
approach in this regard :)
http://svarog386.sourceforge.net

Mateusz
-- 
FreeDOS is present on the USENET, too! alt.os.free-dos


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

Hello!

On 2017-11-04 16:02, Dale E Sterner wrote:

I don't believe that freedos should be restricted to only
open software but should promote anything that
improves dos, like QV which is closed but great
dos software. DOS is on the edge of extinction and
needs all the help it can get. Owner of closed softwre
could be asked to include the source in their wills.


cheers
DS


Isn't that exactly what JPSoftware did with 4DOS?
And speaking of it, 4DOS isn't free - it is specifically restricted to 
FreeDOS, which makes it non-free.


I'm also thinking that FreeDOS should include a not-so-free and even a 
non-free section of software. The only limit should be restriction of 
redistribution.


In the good old days DOS used to be all about freeware, shareware, 
proprietory stuff and open source programs (at lot of them came from 
Linux at that time...)


Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

Hi!

On 2017-11-04 18:02, Ralf Quint wrote:

On 11/4/2017 4:58 AM, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:

I too have a couple of old 486 systems and recently also two 286
laptops (yeah!) but I wasn't yet able to install FreeDOS on them. The
first reason being that my first project, a desktop 486, doesn't have
a CD-ROM drive and, natually, no USB either. The only way to get
FreeDOS on the HDD was to place it into a different system (a P4) and
install it there. The bad news: this very HDD was too small for
FreeDOS. So at that point I did give up, mostly due to my real life
job which doesn't give me enough spare time to continue the project,
at least for now.

Harddrive too small for FreeDOS? Sorry, but the smallest hard drive I
ever owned and used in DOS was 20MB and that is enough to install
FreeDOS 10 time over...
You can run FreeDOS off a 1.2/1.44MB floppy disk drive!

Sorry but that story doesn't hold up . And it doesn't have anything to
do with the subject of this unfortunate thread...


I did install a couple of software too. What good is DOS without 
programs, right? But even deselecting the compilers and the GUI it 
didn't fit. I wanted to select only really relevant packages next, but 
work called and I had to stop the project for the time. As soon as I 
find the time, I will continue to try.


Yes, I know that DOS fits a floppy! That DOS isn't of any use though - 
you need at least one program.
Also, a lot of what the FreeDOS distribution offers are utilities, 
meaning: they also don't do anything for you except if you have other 
data/programs. Take ZIP as an example: without something to ZIP it's 
just sitting there waiting. No one would say: "I have to work with ZIP 
today to get my work done" or "I want to play with ZIP the whole day, 
because it's so much fun".


Sorry for being sarcastic. It's my nature. I appologize in advance.

So much for the story of a total fail...

Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Ralf Quint]

On 11/4/2017 4:58 AM, userbeit...@abwesend.de wrote:
>
> I too have a couple of old 486 systems and recently also two 286
> laptops (yeah!) but I wasn't yet able to install FreeDOS on them. The
> first reason being that my first project, a desktop 486, doesn't have
> a CD-ROM drive and, natually, no USB either. The only way to get
> FreeDOS on the HDD was to place it into a different system (a P4) and
> install it there. The bad news: this very HDD was too small for
> FreeDOS. So at that point I did give up, mostly due to my real life
> job which doesn't give me enough spare time to continue the project,
> at least for now. 
Harddrive too small for FreeDOS? Sorry, but the smallest hard drive I
ever owned and used in DOS was 20MB and that is enough to install
FreeDOS 10 time over...
You can run FreeDOS off a 1.2/1.44MB floppy disk drive!

Sorry but that story doesn't hold up . And it doesn't have anything to
do with the subject of this unfortunate thread...

Ralf


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 6:58 AM,   wrote:
>
> On 2017-11-04, 11:41, Dimitris Zilaskos wrote:
>>
>> There some bad heated past definitely which hopefully will be cooled down by 
>> time

Have you actually *tried* his latest drivers on FreeDOS proper?? If
not, then why defend him?

UIDE has been closed source (and renamed) since 30 months ago, so it's
not getting resolved any time soon. He intentionally doesn't want to
cooperate and is punishing all users. I'm tired of hearing about it:
the drivers just aren't that useful.

"Just use Linux! [DOSEMU2]" No begging needed! It's Free, it works,
and it's *better* than UIDE. And yes, it still uses FreeDOS.
Seriously, we don't *need* his crap.

>> but ultimately like I said, there is a number of dos era systems that
>> people like myself may want to use with FreeDOS and [buggy] drivers are an
>> option to do that when available for use - in my case for example when the
>> reported issues with the supplied memory managers were not likely to be 
>> resolved
>> any time soon.

I assume you mean JEMM386. But you don't need that to run DOS. Heck,
you don't technically need XMS either (although that limits you a fair
bit). Same with CWSDPMI, not strictly necessary (for 8086) but very
useful. I don't regularly need or use JEMM.

>> So users such as myself may want to have as many options to get
>> these old dos era beasts working available to them.

Despite irrational opposition, we still mirror 2015 UIDE (with
sources) on iBiblio. I suppose they are considered "deprecated", but
they do mostly work. (It's later versions that I wouldn't recommend.)

https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/dos/ellis/drivers-2015-03-05.zip

> I too have a couple of old 486 systems and recently also two 286 laptops
> (yeah!) but I wasn't yet able to install FreeDOS on them. The first reason
> being that my first project, a desktop 486, doesn't have a CD-ROM drive and,
> natually, no USB either.

No floppy drive? How much stuff did you want to install?

I know it's not DOS, but Chromebooks are cheap. Make sure what you
want to do can't be done there. Even I have to admit that sometimes
"new!!!1" is just as good (or better) for casual usage. (I swear, some
claim up to 10 hours battery charge!)

> The only way to get FreeDOS on the HDD was to place
> it into a different system (a P4) and install it there. The bad news: this
> very HDD was too small for FreeDOS. So at that point I did give up

Obviously you don't need a big hard drive, minimally, but I guess it
depends on your needs and wants. Presumably you should manually
install and not try a "full" install here.

> My question to you is:
> Why not use real retro software on real retro systems? I plan to install DR
> DOS 5.0, which I still have a legal copy of.

AFAIK, DR-DOS 5 is compatible only to MS-DOS 3.3. Similarly, DR-DOS 6
is for MS-DOS 5. So you're using very old versions. I don't know why
you would prefer those over FreeDOS. (Of course, with MetaKern, you
can presumably use both.)

> ... since those programs are no longer sold.

DR-DOS 7.03 is still sold online. So is ROM-DOS 7. I would "maybe"
recommend WayBack Machine's copy of EDR-DOS 7.x (non-commercial)
instead, if you absolutely had to use some DR-DOS variant.

But I still think FreeDOS has wonderful (better??) compatibility, overall.

> Memory managers like Quarterdeck EMM (QEMM) and 386MAX come to mind.

Last I heard, QEMM maxes out at 256 MB of RAM, but I could be wrong.
(Maybe ask RayeR?)

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[John R. Sowden]

here here

On 11/04/2017 08:02 AM, Dale E Sterner wrote:

I don't believe that freedos should be restricted to only
open software but should promote anything that
improves dos, like QV which is closed but great
dos software. DOS is on the edge of extinction and
needs all the help it can get. Owner of closed softwre
could be asked to include the source in their wills.


cheers
DS




On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 00:17:18 + Dimitris Zilaskos 
writes:

Hi,

Jack's drivers are required on a number of dos-era systems else
FreeDOS
will not even install/boot. Being unable to use FreeDOS is annoying
but a
working system is needed and the wishes of the owners of the
respective
intellectual property have to be respected.

Cheers,

Dimitris

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Ralf Quint 
wrote:


On 11/3/2017 7:19 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote:

just as a tiny side note:

I am only aware of 2 persons THAT CONSISTENTLY SHOUT.
Jack and the american president.


+1 :-P

Ralf


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus

software.

https://www.avast.com/antivirus



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


We Say GoodBye To Sally Fields
iflperfecttouch.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/59fdd724a256572307aest03duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user





--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Dale E Sterner]

I don't believe that freedos should be restricted to only
open software but should promote anything that
improves dos, like QV which is closed but great
dos software. DOS is on the edge of extinction and
needs all the help it can get. Owner of closed softwre
could be asked to include the source in their wills.


cheers
DS




On Sat, 4 Nov 2017 00:17:18 + Dimitris Zilaskos 
writes:
> Hi,
> 
> Jack's drivers are required on a number of dos-era systems else 
> FreeDOS
> will not even install/boot. Being unable to use FreeDOS is annoying 
> but a
> working system is needed and the wishes of the owners of the 
> respective
> intellectual property have to be respected.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dimitris
> 
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Ralf Quint  
> wrote:
> 
> > On 11/3/2017 7:19 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote:
> > >
> > > just as a tiny side note:
> > >
> > > I am only aware of 2 persons THAT CONSISTENTLY SHOUT.
> > > Jack and the american president.
> > >
> > +1 :-P
> >
> > Ralf
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus 
> software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> >
> >
> > 
> > --
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > ___
> > Freedos-user mailing list
> > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> >


**
>From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
***


We Say GoodBye To Sally Fields
iflperfecttouch.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/59fdd724a256572307aest03duc

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Dimitris Zilaskos]

Thank you, it is in my to do list to try them it is just limited personal
time - it takes lot of effort to revive retro systems and getting a working
DOS is only part of the challenge. Sometimes newer software such as FreeDOS
or Jack's drivers save a lot of time to get things working and the job done
faster and smoother, allowing for more time to be spend for example looking
for parts in friends' basements.

Cheers,

Dimitris

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:58 AM,  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> On 2017-11-04, 11:41, Dimitris Zilaskos wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> There some bad heated past definitely which hopefully will be cooled down
>> by
>> time but ultimately like I said, there is a number of dos era systems that
>> people like myself may want to use with FreeDOS and Jack's drivers are an
>> option
>> to do that when available for use - in my case for example when the
>> reported
>> issues with the supplied memory managers were not likely to be resolved
>> any time
>> soon. So users such as myself may want to have as many options to get
>> these old
>> dos era beasts working available to them. I was particularly happy when I
>> was
>> able to use my systems with FreeDOS in ways I never had before and I
>> received
>> extensive help from the community especially Jack, Eric as well as others
>> so
>> this whole ordeal is holding some of my retro projects back.
>>
>
> I too have a couple of old 486 systems and recently also two 286 laptops
> (yeah!) but I wasn't yet able to install FreeDOS on them. The first reason
> being that my first project, a desktop 486, doesn't have a CD-ROM drive
> and, natually, no USB either. The only way to get FreeDOS on the HDD was to
> place it into a different system (a P4) and install it there. The bad news:
> this very HDD was too small for FreeDOS. So at that point I did give up,
> mostly due to my real life job which doesn't give me enough spare time to
> continue the project, at least for now.
>
> My question to you is:
> Why not use real retro software on real retro systems? I plan to install
> DR DOS 5.0, which I still have a legal copy of. I also plan to get
> abandonware of that time, which will not be a problem for a private person.
> Yes, it could be called "stealing", but it really is not, since those
> programs are no longer sold. Abandonware is clealy not trying to ruin
> businesses, but when there is no chance to give them money for it, then
> there is no damage. And the spirit is specifically to preserve old
> software, not to steal it.
>
> Memory managers like Quarterdeck EMM (QEMM) and 386MAX come to mind. They
> *could* be available from abandonware sites, but I didn't check.
>
> It may be possible to use FreeDOS with those memory managers. If they do
> their job properly, you should use them.
>
> Cheers,
> A.
>
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[userbeitrag]

Hi!

On 2017-11-04, 11:41, Dimitris Zilaskos wrote:

Hi,

There some bad heated past definitely which hopefully will be cooled down by
time but ultimately like I said, there is a number of dos era systems that
people like myself may want to use with FreeDOS and Jack's drivers are an option
to do that when available for use - in my case for example when the reported
issues with the supplied memory managers were not likely to be resolved any time
soon. So users such as myself may want to have as many options to get these old
dos era beasts working available to them. I was particularly happy when I was
able to use my systems with FreeDOS in ways I never had before and I received
extensive help from the community especially Jack, Eric as well as others so
this whole ordeal is holding some of my retro projects back.


I too have a couple of old 486 systems and recently also two 286 laptops 
(yeah!) but I wasn't yet able to install FreeDOS on them. The first 
reason being that my first project, a desktop 486, doesn't have a CD-ROM 
drive and, natually, no USB either. The only way to get FreeDOS on the 
HDD was to place it into a different system (a P4) and install it there. 
The bad news: this very HDD was too small for FreeDOS. So at that point 
I did give up, mostly due to my real life job which doesn't give me 
enough spare time to continue the project, at least for now.


My question to you is:
Why not use real retro software on real retro systems? I plan to install 
DR DOS 5.0, which I still have a legal copy of. I also plan to get 
abandonware of that time, which will not be a problem for a private 
person. Yes, it could be called "stealing", but it really is not, since 
those programs are no longer sold. Abandonware is clealy not trying to 
ruin businesses, but when there is no chance to give them money for it, 
then there is no damage. And the spirit is specifically to preserve old 
software, not to steal it.


Memory managers like Quarterdeck EMM (QEMM) and 386MAX come to mind. 
They *could* be available from abandonware sites, but I didn't check.


It may be possible to use FreeDOS with those memory managers. If they do 
their job properly, you should use them.


Cheers,
A.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Dimitris Zilaskos]

Hi,

There some bad heated past definitely which hopefully will be cooled down
by time but ultimately like I said, there is a number of dos era systems
that people like myself may want to use with FreeDOS and Jack's drivers are
an option to do that when available for use - in my case for example when
the reported issues with the supplied memory managers were not likely to be
resolved any time soon. So users such as myself may want to have as many
options to get these old dos era beasts working available to them. I was
particularly happy when I was able to use my systems with FreeDOS in ways I
never had before and I received extensive help from the community
especially Jack, Eric as well as others so this whole ordeal is holding
some of my retro projects back.

Cheers,

Dimitris

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Rugxulo  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Dimitris Zilaskos 
> wrote:
> >
> > the wishes of the owners of the respective intellectual property have to
> be respected.
>
> Personal opinion does not invalidate the law, and a so-called license
> is only valid if it doesn't contradict the system enforcing it.
>
> Just because a disgruntled developer is angry (unfairly, I might add)
> doesn't give him the right to rescind pre-existing licenses or do
> whatever irrational thing he wants.
>
> Can he legally go "closed source" based upon a whim? Sure, but that's
> not what he did.
>
> He 100% directly blamed me for saying "the drivers don't work anymore"
> (which I have screenshots to prove is true for the Mar-18-2015
> release, which is what he directly emailed me about, telling me to
> mirror for FreeDOS, even though that was after he'd already explicitly
> said he was "giving up on FleaDOS").
>
> He even went so far as to try to pretend that his old releases were
> legally "tainted" so that Jim Hall would get scared and delete them.
> So the only reason we still have any old releases is due to
> stubbornness against him. If he had his way, we wouldn't even have
> that. He is VERY vengeful, and unfairly so.
>
> At this point I have (sadly, unproven) reason to suspect that "he" is
> not who he says "he" is. Either that or someone else is intercepting
> and pretending to be us. So I highly suspect that not all messages
> from "him" were really written by one person. But that's probably
> nothing new in such a hostile world. Anyways, if you want to be naive,
> just call it extreme emotional distress, mental illness, or similar.
> It's not rational behavior from a sane person. You cannot negotiate
> with such a person, they either can't or flat out refuse to
> understand.
>
> Some or all of his trivial personal details are probably bogus. Maybe
> I'm too cynical and suspicious at this point, but it makes no sense.
> For months he said he couldn't get on the mailing list, and then
> magically he reappeared. But all he did is blame me, insult heavily,
> and go closed source. Call *me* crazy, but freedos-user sounds like
> the complete opposite place to do that! So yeah, the whole technical
> "problem" that started this long ordeal was resolved but ignored in
> lieu of bigger (psychological) problems.
>
> Sigh. I don't want to bring all this up, but some people (even
> geniuses whom I respect, like Eric Auer) can't seem to let go. And
> that's another thing I don't understand, but I don't want to get into
> all of "that" either! Ugh.
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi,

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Dimitris Zilaskos  wrote:
>
> the wishes of the owners of the respective intellectual property have to be 
> respected.

Personal opinion does not invalidate the law, and a so-called license
is only valid if it doesn't contradict the system enforcing it.

Just because a disgruntled developer is angry (unfairly, I might add)
doesn't give him the right to rescind pre-existing licenses or do
whatever irrational thing he wants.

Can he legally go "closed source" based upon a whim? Sure, but that's
not what he did.

He 100% directly blamed me for saying "the drivers don't work anymore"
(which I have screenshots to prove is true for the Mar-18-2015
release, which is what he directly emailed me about, telling me to
mirror for FreeDOS, even though that was after he'd already explicitly
said he was "giving up on FleaDOS").

He even went so far as to try to pretend that his old releases were
legally "tainted" so that Jim Hall would get scared and delete them.
So the only reason we still have any old releases is due to
stubbornness against him. If he had his way, we wouldn't even have
that. He is VERY vengeful, and unfairly so.

At this point I have (sadly, unproven) reason to suspect that "he" is
not who he says "he" is. Either that or someone else is intercepting
and pretending to be us. So I highly suspect that not all messages
from "him" were really written by one person. But that's probably
nothing new in such a hostile world. Anyways, if you want to be naive,
just call it extreme emotional distress, mental illness, or similar.
It's not rational behavior from a sane person. You cannot negotiate
with such a person, they either can't or flat out refuse to
understand.

Some or all of his trivial personal details are probably bogus. Maybe
I'm too cynical and suspicious at this point, but it makes no sense.
For months he said he couldn't get on the mailing list, and then
magically he reappeared. But all he did is blame me, insult heavily,
and go closed source. Call *me* crazy, but freedos-user sounds like
the complete opposite place to do that! So yeah, the whole technical
"problem" that started this long ordeal was resolved but ignored in
lieu of bigger (psychological) problems.

Sigh. I don't want to bring all this up, but some people (even
geniuses whom I respect, like Eric Auer) can't seem to let go. And
that's another thing I don't understand, but I don't want to get into
all of "that" either! Ugh.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Rugxulo]

Hi, Tom,

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Tom Ehlert  wrote:
>
> even closed, unfree, paid for software usually comes with a link so I
> can find more description (rather then 'more fail-safe 386 XMS move'),
> download it, see fee ( '25$ per PC'), limitations ('not for military'),
> price and more.
>
> but 'can be requested from ...', meaning
>  'on a good day, ... might decide to send you a copy.
>   on a bad day, NOT.'
>
> is the stupidest thing I have read for a long time.
> this has no place on this list, and you should know that.

It has been that way since he got very abusive verbally, on- (and
off-) list, right before he was banned (July 2015) from freedos-user.
He hid the download URL on purpose.

It makes absolutely no rational sense to me, but he's irrational. He
wanted to punish us (and me) for imaginary offenses that he took the
wrong way unfairly. (The only public claim he made against me was that
I said "the drivers don't work anymore", which is 100% proven true for
Mar-18-2015 version. That's literally it.)

His actions include:

1). not responding or taking any useful action on the SF.net bug
tracker that Jim Hall created for him (where I was conveying info
to/from him)
2). refusing to let me announce or mirror his drivers (until he could
announce them himself, but SF.net "bug" permanently prevented it)
3). going closed source (directly to spite me, which he said with many
insults to me, even though I did nothing to him)
4). hiding the DropBox URL of his liaison where his releases were
semi-published (in anger against us, yet again)
5). trying to lie and claim "tainted" on 2015 open-sourced versions of
his drivers, to try to force Jim Hall to panic and remove them all
from iBiblio
6). (again) adding FreeDOS "prohibitions" even in his closed-source
drivers (several times, even in 2017)

I don't know why Eric is still so obsessed with relaying new
information about it to us. It's useless. "Just use Linux! [DOSEMU2]"

> it's even stupider as most readers of this list have no email address

I know the email of his liaison and corresponding website (where
extensive version history is listed). I can easily point you to it
privately, but I think it's pointless (and then some!).

Here's just a small snippet, just to show you how "useful" these
drivers are for us:

15-Jul-16: Use of these drivers with FreeDOS is now PROHIBITED!
13-Jan-17: FreeDOS restrictions deleted
1-May-17: FreeDOS prohibitions re-added

Yes, totally sane behavior for a man who intentionally "gave up" on
FreeDOS and then later (due to abusive language) was explicitly banned
from the mailing list two years ago! (He's already obsessively had 13
updates this year alone. It's very annoying at this point. I just
don't care.)

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Mateusz Viste]

On Sat, 04 Nov 2017 00:17:18 +, Dimitris Zilaskos wrote:
> Jack's drivers are required on a number of dos-era systems else FreeDOS
> will not even install/boot.

If it won't install nor boot, then how would you use any drivers in the 
first place?
Any bug reports?

> Being unable to use FreeDOS is annoying but
> a working system is needed and the wishes of the owners of the
> respective intellectual property have to be respected.

Everyone's free to do whatever he wants. But this list, last time I 
checked, is about FreeDOS, or in general - Free DOS software (not 
freeware).

Mateusz
-- 
FreeDOS is present on the USENET, too! alt.os.free-dos


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Dimitris Zilaskos]

Hi,

Jack's drivers are required on a number of dos-era systems else FreeDOS
will not even install/boot. Being unable to use FreeDOS is annoying but a
working system is needed and the wishes of the owners of the respective
intellectual property have to be respected.

Cheers,

Dimitris

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Ralf Quint  wrote:

> On 11/3/2017 7:19 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote:
> >
> > just as a tiny side note:
> >
> > I am only aware of 2 persons THAT CONSISTENTLY SHOUT.
> > Jack and the american president.
> >
> +1 :-P
>
> Ralf
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> ___
> Freedos-user mailing list
> Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Ralf Quint]

On 11/3/2017 7:19 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote:
>
> just as a tiny side note:
>
> I am only aware of 2 persons THAT CONSISTENTLY SHOUT.
> Jack and the american president.
>
+1 :-P

Ralf


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Tom Ehlert]

> Also, did you know that UMBPCI is actively maintained
> and more reliable in finding out which areas can be
> used for UMB etc. than JEMM / JEMM386? So it can be
> a good idea to use explicit EMM options based on what
> UMBPCI detected: This avoids more conflicts than the
> easier method of letting JEMM / JEMM386 autodetect.

interesting.

can you try to contact Uwe Sieber if he would be willing to
share his used memory detection logic.

Tom


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Tom Ehlert]

Dear Eric,


> Hi :-) Quick news from Jack's drivers: He has a closed
> source update for XMGR (more fail-safe 386 XMS move)
> and UHDD: The new UHDD has the interesting feature of
> read-ahead for cache sizes of at least 20 MB. It is
> a simplified version without I/O overlap and DOS RAM
> search table location and "/G" command line options.
> Sample copies can be requested from Johnson or Jack.

even closed, unfree, paid for software usually comes with a link so I
can find more description (rather then 'more fail-safe 386 XMS move'),
download it, see fee ( '25$ per PC'), limitations ('not for military'),
price and more.

but 'can be requested from Johnson or Jack', meaning
 'on a good day, Jack might decide to send you a copy.
  on a bad day, NOT.'

is the stupidest thing I have read for a long time.
this has no place on this list, and you should know that.

it's even stupider as most readers of this list have no email address
of Johnson or Jack.



just as a tiny side note:

I am only aware of 2 persons THAT CONSISTENTLY SHOUT.
Jack and the american president.


Tom




--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Mateusz Viste]

On Fri, 03 Nov 2017 12:23:55 +0100, Eric Auer wrote:
>>> Quick news from /dev/null 's drivers: [etc. rant etc.]
> 
> In short, you said "nag nag nag" ;-)

While it's obviously true that Rugxulo have some ranting issues, I don't 
see any reason to promote proprietary software on the FreeDOS list 
either... There are surely many better places/forums for that.

Mateusz
-- 
FreeDOS is present on the USENET, too! alt.os.free-dos


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

Re: [Freedos-user] Some driver updates

[Eric Auer]

Hi Rugxulo,

>> Quick news from /dev/null 's drivers: [etc. rant etc.]

In short, you said "nag nag nag" ;-)

The features might still be interesting to test. Nobody
suggested to include any closed source in any distro.

Eric


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Freedos-user mailing list
Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user