On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 at 22:35, Jim Hall <jh...@freedos.org> wrote: > > Yup, that's exactly how I used FreeDOS in DOSEMU in the 1990s. I'd > start up DOSEMU running FreeDOS, then start up GNU Emacs on Linux. I'd > edit my source files in Emacs (Linux), and compile them on FreeDOS > (DOSEMU). And I didn't close Emacs when I compiled, I just saved my > files then switched windows. That way, if I had a compile-time error > (missing semicolon, undeclared variable, whatever) I switched windows > to make a quick fix in Emacs, saved, then switched back to DOSEMU > recompile on FreeDOS. Worked great! I wrote a lot of early FreeDOS > stuff that way.
OK. You already answered that, or most of that, BTW... > For me, it's just that I stopped using DOSEMU 1.x a long time ago when > no one maintained it. Why does that matter? Maybe it just did all its programmers wanted, and so it didn't need more work? I am aware of this position but I don't reeally understand it. I mean, are we not all here because we want to run DOS apps? Because most of them went out of development and support about a quarter of a century ago. But they still work, they still do the job, so why not use the same old tool? > I found other solutions to booting FreeDOS on > Linux, and those solutions work fine for me, so I don't need to go > back to DOSEMU. DOSEMU is fine (and I hear they've done a lot of work > on DOSEMU2) but it's not what I use. These days, I use QEMU and > VirtualBox. Well, AFAICS, because it was easier, smaller, faster, and offered better integration with the host OS. Aren't those reason enough? -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053 _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
