On Sunday 05 April 2009 19:15, Marco Antonio Achury Palma wrote: > I agree is nice to have separated paths for base system and apps. This > is the good old way to make things. The most of the dos apps are self > contained without dependencies. One problem I remember is to have > path to all the apps, sometimes become bigger than the available > environment variable space. > A new different solution may be create a bat file for each app, or a > text database with descriptive name and path to any executable. this > is useful to generate automated launch menu.
Well, the "\BIN" directory is only for system stuff. Any third-party things won't be there anyway. The real question is "is there any advantage to put some really basic system files into \BIN and more advanced one in \SBIN". I was thinking about making a difference between "package giving MSDOS functionality" and "other system enhacements", but as Jim said - it doesn't seem to be a quite fortunate choice, as it will most probably lead to a bigger mess than we have currently... The problem which is (at least to me) important know, is to decide how will we package 3rd package application for a FD v1.1 installation. The "old" way would be to put them into \programs and \games subdirectories of the FreeDOS install (that's how we done it in v1.0), but it doesn't sound right to me... Regards, Mateusz Viste > 2009/4/5, Mateusz Viste <mate...@viste-family.net>: > > On Sunday 05 April 2009 16:11, Jim Hall wrote: > >> I think Mateusz is suggesting separating the programs from the "base" > >> list (in ...\BIN) from those that are in "devel" or "util" (in > >> ...\SBIN). In this case, FORMAT would show up in ...\BIN. > > > > Yes, it was indeed my idea... > > > >> Imagine all the (new?) packages that should really be in "util" that > >> might be put in ...\BIN format because the developer/contributor wants > >> them to be in "base" (even though the program might not replicate any > >> original functionality of MSDOS.) > > > > I guess you're right here, Jim ;-) > > We should look at FreeDOS as an independant system, not just a MSDOS > > replacement... > > > >> It's better to keep with the original spec on this, use the ...\BIN > >> for all binaries. > > > > Okay, let's not change a wining team then :) > > > > How about installing 3rd party applications? I searched through FreeDOS > > technotes, but couldn't find anything related to packages installation > > paths... > > FreeDOS v1.0 was installing all third-party applications in the FreeDOS > > directory, which is IMHO a very bad thing. Many people wants to keep theirs > > applications in a separate path, for eg. on a different hard drive. Having a > > environement variable pointing to "the place where all my games/programs > > have to go" would definitely resolve this issue. That's something the > > FreeDOS installer should ask for at the installation (Where do you want to > > put FreeDOS files? Where do you want to put any non-freedos applications?). > > > > However, it's not a trivial thing to do, as we would need a way to tell > > "this is a FreeDOS package, while this one is 3rd party one". Nothing like > > that is ready today. Obviously, it would require some additional > > developpement on FDPKG, too... > > > > Best regards, > > Mateusz Viste > > -- > > You'll find my public OpenPGP key at > > http://www.viste-family.net/mateusz/pub_key > > > > > -- -- You'll find my public OpenPGP key at http://www.viste-family.net/mateusz/pub_key
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
