Wouldn't it have been smarter to request a relicense to LGPL for FreeDOS-32?
That would fix his problems
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 3:22 AM, Christian Masloch wrote:
> > As far as I can tell, the last commit in the SVN for the project was in
> > 2007, so it's either abandoned, in hiatus, or goin
As far as I can tell, the last commit in the SVN for the project was in
2007, so it's either abandoned, in hiatus, or going so slowly that no
commits have been pushed through in the last two years.
Remaking the FreeDOS kernel to be 32-bit might be rather significant, or
even to 64-bit, since we are
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Tom Ehlert wrote:
> > Because running Win32 console applications are not reliable in HX. I have
> a
> > few of them on my own FreeDOS machine, and they don't really run very
> well.
>
> is that your entry to the ever lasting 'WORST BUG REPORT EVER'
> competition ?
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Robert Riebisch wrote:
> King InuYasha wrote:
>
> > HX Extender is not a very good Win32 console runner,
>
> Why do you think so?
>
> Robert Riebisch
> --
> BTTR Software
> http://www.bttr-software.de/
>
Because running Win32 c
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
> Michael Robinson schreef:
> > There are many Windows programs that only work in
> > dos based Windows. There is such a thing as a dos
> > based Windows program, try to run it at the dos
> > prompt ( any version ) and you'll get a this
> > re
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Michael Robinson
wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 06:23 -0800, dos386 wrote:
> > This is off-topic and irrelevant anyway ...
>
> No it is not and it is rude of you to say that it
> is. It is not because one of the goals of Freedos
> development has been to at least
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:00 PM, guest wrote:
> First off, would I be asking for a freedos compatible Windows
> replacement if I could just use ReactOS?
>
> I know about ReactOS, ReactOS is garbage right now. It will probably be
> garbage for 2-3 more years.
> There is no reason for an MSDOS Win
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Jim Hall wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:21 AM, King InuYasha wrote:
> > Instead of asking for it to remove the sources each time a package is
> > installed, why not tally it all up and as the last step, users can select
> if
> > they
Instead of asking for it to remove the sources each time a package is
installed, why not tally it all up and as the last step, users can select if
they want sources or not, and if they do, they can select which ones they
want, with an option to select them all. This is a much better user
experience
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Adam Norton wrote:
> Windows 3x Issues
>
> I was reading the Undocumented Dos book and according to it Win 3.x goes
> to extraordinary lengths to insure that the operating system it is
> running on os MSDos and not one of the alternatives.
> Plus it replaces parts
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Larry wrote:
>
> pcwrite was a pretty complete shareware word processor that we used
> successfully in a workplace to write reports. It may still be around either
> as share or abandoned.
>
> --- On Sun, 4/12/09, Jim Hall wrote:
>
> > From: Jim Hall
> > Subject
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Eric Auer wrote:
>
> Hi :-)
>
> > Realistically, someone should make a clone of Windows 3.1.
> > This makes more sense than making freedos unstable.
>
> Unstable is only needed for 386 enh mode or wfworkgroups.
>
> > Windows 3.1 isn't that heavy
>
> Depends... On
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Adam Norton wrote:
> * Calmira for GUI or someone could write a Program Manager for GUI like
> Windows 3.x. Personally, I like the style of Windows 3.x over the
> Windows 95 style of GUI.
> I can't remember if Win 3.1 had context menus or not and I kind of like
> a
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:03 AM, King InuYasha wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:51 PM, usul wrote:
>
>> "Realistically, someone should make a clone of Windows 3..0/3.11."
>>
>> Call it Janus or Snowball after the code names for Windows 3..0/3.11
>> :)
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:51 PM, usul wrote:
> "Realistically, someone should make a clone of Windows 3..0/3.11."
>
> Call it Janus or Snowball after the code names for Windows 3..0/3.11
> :)
>
> I have been doing research on this and I am considering doing this.
> Since I wanted to make a GUI fo
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Alain M. wrote:
>
> King InuYasha escreveu:
> > I believe Info-ZIP has a suitable replacement for PKware's DOS pkzip and
> > pkunzip (ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/msdos/).
>
> Yes, it is compatible, just has a different comma
Is fdupdate compiled with SSE or MMX or any other special instruction sets
that are unavailable in 486? If so, just recompile with those disabled.
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Michael Robinson
wrote:
> I'm still stumped as to why fdupdate works on my Pentium 4,
> but it doesn't work on my 486.
I believe Info-ZIP has a suitable replacement for PKware's DOS pkzip and
pkunzip (ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/msdos/).
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 3:14 AM, Mateusz Viste wrote:
> On Friday 03 April 2009 06:12, Blair Campbell wrote:
> > arj is open-source (http://arj.sourceforge.net/) and pkzip
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Jim Hall wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Michael Robinson
> wrote:
> > What is the status of Freedos 1.1? It has been a while since the you
> > can help link has been updated.
> >
>
> I believe the core issues haven't changed:
>
> 1. The new FDUPDATE i
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Tom Ehlert wrote:
> > LFN for FAT and for NTFS are working stable in Linux. Could a FreeDOS
> > developer grab this free knowledge from Linux and improve DOSLFN this
> way?
> very unlikely. Linux drivers are too different from DOS kernel or DOS
> TSR to be useful
Or PDCurses?
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:28 PM, King InuYasha wrote:
> What about ncurses?
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 5:15 PM, FabrÃcio Ceolin wrote:
>
>> It's a great idea, but I think dialog works well only under djgpp bash.
>>
>> I tried to use dialog u
What about ncurses?
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 5:15 PM, FabrÃcio Ceolin wrote:
> It's a great idea, but I think dialog works well only under djgpp bash.
>
> I tried to use dialog under freedos, but there isn't a stderr, so all
> options, inputs, forms and interface goes to stdout together.
> It's ve
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Michael Robinson
wrote:
>
>
>
It is truly sad that Microsoft, since it doesn't support it's
> dos versions of Word anymore, won't allow free redistribution
> of it. The reality is, there are very few old computers left
> that can only run dos, compared to the numbe
23 matches
Mail list logo
