Are you saying Linux over freedos.
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:27:37 -0500 Rugxulo writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Dale E Sterner
> wrote:
> >
> > If Jack's drivers are left out of version 1.2 ; is there
> > something to replace them.
>
> https://www.kernel.org/
>
>
---
Hi,
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Dale E Sterner wrote:
>
> If Jack's drivers are left out of version 1.2 ; is there
> something to replace them.
https://www.kernel.org/
--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely
If Jack's drivers are left out of version 1.2 ; is there
something to replace them.
DS
On Thu, 12 May 2016 17:19:28 -0500 Rugxulo writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr.
> wrote:
> >
> > So far, I have gone through all of the ARCHIVER and BASE packages
> and
> On May 12, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Rugxulo wrote:
[..]
> https://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.0/pkgs/commands.zip
[..]
Thanks, Jerome
--
Mobile security can be enabling, not merely rest
Hi,
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr.
wrote:
>
> So far, I have gone through all of the ARCHIVER and BASE packages and have
> corrected their LSM data.
>
> In those groups, these packages have not been solved.
>
> Unknown license information and will probably be dropped from
So far, I have gone through all of the ARCHIVER and BASE packages and have
corrected their LSM data.
In those groups, these packages have not been solved.
Unknown license information and will probably be dropped from release,
ARCHIVER/ARJ
ARCHIVER/ZOO
Missing sources,
BASE/COMMAND
Yet
Hi,
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 4:14 AM, Eric Auer wrote:
>
> Which other DOS apps have HDA?
Not many! (But don't forget Judas Player's ALSA/HDA/GPL version.)
Sound (or just low-level stuff overall) is probably the weakest link in DOS.
Unfortunately, even with relatively good development tools, we
Hi!
>> and my sound (Intel high-definition audio) has no DOS support from what
>> I read on this emailing list,
>
> No universal or "good" support, but a very very few DOS apps do have
> (some) limited HDA support.
Which? Mpxplay, maybe a port of mplayer, experimental ports of
the HX DOS extend
Hi,
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Thomas Mueller wrote:
>
> I think there is only one web browser, Dillo?
Not sure about "official" repo or packages (as there's too many files
to keep close track of, IMHO).
> Are others available as add-ons: Lynx, Links-GUI, Arachne? I can't think of
> any
I see your (Jerome Shidel) list of packages, BASE and ALL, no need to quote the
list.
I think there is only one web browser, Dillo?
Are others available as add-ons: Lynx, Links-GUI, Arachne? I can't think of
any other current or recent web browsers for DOS.
This so far is mainly a matter of c
Updated list of packages that still need LSM data and License version
verification.
; FreeDOS Installer Package List File
; BASE Packages
archiver\unzip
archiver\zip
base\assign
base\attrib
base\chkdsk
base\choice
base\command
base\comp
base\cpidos
base\ctmouse
base\debug
base\defrag
base\deltr
Hi!
> XMGR along with UIDE and several other packages have been dropped from
> FreeDOS 1.2.
>
> This was not my decision. But, I completely agree with the reasoning behind
> their removal.
There were small doubts about XMGR being clean-room without MS HIMEM
contamination but no other packages
Thanks Jerome, that they were still in the REPO is what threw me off. I
have already eliminated them from all my configurations.
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr.
wrote:
>
> > What did we decide about XMGR?
>
> XMGR along with UIDE and several other packages have been droppe
> What did we decide about XMGR?
XMGR along with UIDE and several other packages have been dropped from FreeDOS
1.2.
This was not my decision. But, I completely agree with the reasoning behind
their removal.
These are still available on the ibiblio repository. So, if you really need
them in
What did we decide about XMGR?
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Jerome Shidel wrote:
>
> > So you just want us to weed out the license-incompatible ones??
>
> That is only part of what is needed.
> Some packages have wrong or old license information. For example, some
> have switched from GPL to
> So you just want us to weed out the license-incompatible ones??
That is only part of what is needed.
Some packages have wrong or old license information. For example, some have
switched from GPL to BSD. Others, are listed as GPL, but are actually GPLv2.
And so on.
>> base\ctmouse
>
> Needs
Hi,
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 5:52 AM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr. wrote:
>
> FreeDOS 1.2 needs your help verifying package information. This is one of the
> main holdups for the
> next OS release. Verifying this data is correct is essential. Especially the
> the licensing information.
> GPL, GPLv2, MIT,
I made a XDEL utility, clone of DRDO's but it was happily forgotten :(
Alain
On 06-05-2016 07:52, Jerome E. Shidel Jr. wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> FreeDOS 1.2 needs your help verifying package information. This is one of the
> main holdups for the
> next OS release. Verifying this data is correct is
Hello All,
FreeDOS 1.2 needs your help verifying package information. This is one of the
main holdups for the
next OS release. Verifying this data is correct is essential. Especially the
the licensing information.
GPL, GPLv2, MIT, BSD …… Other information, such as website, authors and etc,
s
19 matches
Mail list logo
