Okay, I'm starting to get fed up with this kind of behavior. Eric sent an email to me & Aitor 07/19/2004 04:21 PM asking where he can upload some changes for the To-Do list, and asking about the changes he already submitted to the To-Do list, saying "... Or are there other reasons apart from "no time" why you avoid uploading the updates and send only ZIPs of the new versions?"
And 07/19/2004 04:21 PM Eric posts his new To-Do list.
So now we have two To-Do lists. Which should be linked from the FreeDOS.org site?
We've seen this kind of behavior before where a developer is not willing to wait for a patch to be incorporated by the maintainer of the package, and so decides to release a second version of that program. In essence, a fork. What we have here is a fork of the To-Do list.
Yes, that's perfectly allowable ... but very irritating. That we've seen this so many times before, and looks like it will continue far into the future, starts to suck the joy out of working on FreeDOS.
</rant>
-jh
Eric Auer wrote:
Hi, I am proud to have finished the first version of my inofficial FreeDOS 1.0 TODO list on:
http://www.coli.uni-sb.de/~eric/stuff/soft/specials/freedos-inofficial-1.0-todo-list.html
Features: - post 1.0 items are included and marked in a separate color (all link to http://www.freedos.org/news/version1/post/ where you can usually find more information about that item) - EXIT CODE LIST translated to English language as suggested on http://www.freedos.org/news/version1/ (have done that a while ago but nobody linked it from the FreeDOS site yet...) - this list asks YOU, the READER, for feedback. Please send that feedback directly to me, unless it is also relevant for the offical list (which is maintained by Aitor as you know...) - "list of hard to test bugs" (for which you need particular hardware or software to test), "stolen" from Aitor's unpublished TODO list updates, with an extra quick-jump form where you can enter a bug number to jump directly into FreeDOS Bugzilla - comments to explain things which are missing are updated - comments for missing or postponed features now suggest alternative solutions (using other open source or freeware tools) where possible: Please let me know if you have extra suggestions.
Sometimes I have links to "post/" but no color coding for "postponed". This is for cases where I think that the current solution will be good enough even for post-1.0, although there do exist extra suggestions in the post-1.0 list. You will notice that FASTOPEN is not even mentioned: It might be that we eventually add speed optimizations (by remembering recently used slots / doing look-ahead for following slots!) to the kernel for FAT32 FAT chain surfing and anyFAT DIRECTORY surfing. For now, you have to rely on using a disk cache only.
My list tries to mention all "base" packages from the LSM database on FreeDOS.org, let me know if I have forgotten some (language packs for KEYB and MODE/DISPLAY are intentionally left out, and VERIFY is actually a FreeCOM-internal command now. MKEYB is the unlucky (not mentioned) alternative to KEYB, although I actually like MKEYB better (smaller, only 1 file, supports the top 10 keyboard layouts).
Enjoy!
Eric.
PS: Comparing to MS/PC-DOS -> http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/dos/psm952a.html
EDIT - use SETEDIT
REXX - use BASH DYNALOAD - use DEVLOAD
but also:
CALCULATOR - please suggest one SCHEDULER - please suggest one PCMCIA - create something based on the code released by DeskWork
(with translations and comments by me, with help of DeskWork) Memory usage is quite good already, only SHARE and DISPLAY are clearly worse than their MS/IBM counterparts. And our Win3.x compatibility is limited.
(other deficiencies of FreeDOS vs. MS/PC-DOS are listed on my online list, except for the missing QBASIC - BWBasic is no real replacement, but you can download QBASIC from MS and use it on FreeDOS systems, and Basic is Basic ;-))
PPS: Our STACKS are not MS-DOS 3.x+ style, does that matter? The idea is to have N chunks of M bytes each, and every IRQ can get one or more of them, which seems to be elegant in some way!? And the DOS IRQ wrappers support chaining and sharing of IRQs, because they have standardized patchable structure.
-- _____________________________________________________________________________ This email message has been automatically encrypted using ROT-26.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools! Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=4721&alloc_id=10040&op=click _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
