Re: [Freedos-user] defrag

On 10/06/2014 10:03 PM, Marcos Favero Florence de Barros wrote: > Hi, > >> I understand that the only defrag program that runs on true DOS, >> meaning not DOS in MS Windows, and that supports FAT32, is the >> one written for FreeDOS. I also understand that the most >> current version is 1.3.2. > >

[Freedos-user] defrag

Hi, > I understand that the only defrag program that runs on true DOS, > meaning not DOS in MS Windows, and that supports FAT32, is the > one written for FreeDOS. I also understand that the most > current version is 1.3.2. Does it really support FAT32? I thought it didn't. Marcos

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag

Hi, On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:25 AM, John R. Sowden wrote: > > Problem is I cannot find a location to download [Defrag 1.3.2]. The > freedos.org > site does not have the current version where I can download it, and > google is not my friend, in this case. You didn't look in the right place (obv

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag

On 10/06/2014 06:29 AM, Mateusz Viste wrote: > Take a look here, that's the FDNPK online "Base" repository: > > ftp://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.1/repos/base/ > > Mateusz > > > > On 10/06/2014 03:25 PM, John R. Sowden wrote: >> I understand that the only defrag

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag

Take a look here, that's the FDNPK online "Base" repository: ftp://www.ibiblio.org/pub/micro/pc-stuff/freedos/files/distributions/1.1/repos/base/ Mateusz On 10/06/2014 03:25 PM, John R. Sowden wrote: > I understand that the only defrag program that runs on true DOS, meaning > not DOS in MS Win

[Freedos-user] defrag

I understand that the only defrag program that runs on true DOS, meaning not DOS in MS Windows, and that supports FAT32, is the one written for FreeDOS. I also understand that the most current version is 1.3.2. Problem is I cannot find a location to download it. The freedos.org site does not

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

> Granted that you can, it may simply be more trouble than it's worth. Agree. No point to brew 64 KiO clusters. -- Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce. With Perforce, you get hass

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:27 PM, dos386 wrote: >> You can create a 4GB FAT16 partition using WinXP which >> uses 64KB clusters, but it probably isn't accessible from DOS. > > Did you test? EDR-DOS AFAIK does support 64 KiB clusters on FAT16, but > I never tested. No, I didn't. It may be *possibl

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

> You can create a 4GB FAT16 partition using WinXP which > uses 64KB clusters, but it probably isn't accessible from DOS. Did you test? EDR-DOS AFAIK does support 64 KiB clusters on FAT16, but I never tested. > See http://support.macro$oft.com/kb/310561 See drdos.org and drdosprojects.de (latter

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Marcos Florence wrote: > 4GB FAT16 partitions would be a lot better, but for some reason > I couldn't make them. FDISK isn't always easy to use. FAT16 has a 2GB limit, imposed by the format. The smallest area of disk accessible by DOS is the cluster. FAT16 uses

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

Hi, A defrag supporting FAT32 would be nice indeed. I have been taking lots of digital photos recently, and they need large amounts of disk space. The only reason I have been unwilling to use FAT32 is that there is no way of defragmenting. Instead, I made several FAT16 partitions of 2GB each --

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

Hi, On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:37 PM, John R. Sowden wrote: >> > Thanks for the follow up. I can boot with a floppy using MS-DOS 6.2. But I don't think that version supports FAT32. (And I have no idea if defragging FAT is supported under Linux or FreeBSD.) > I think my version of the defrag pro

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

On 02/26/2014 04:16 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 7:53 AM, John R. Sowden > wrote: >> On 02/25/2014 03:00 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote: >> >> When I run the defrag program on my dos machine, It does not allow me to >> do a full defrag. The options are limited (grayed out). > It cou

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

Hi, On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 7:53 AM, John R. Sowden wrote: > On 02/25/2014 03:00 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote: > > When I run the defrag program on my dos machine, It does not allow me to > do a full defrag. The options are limited (grayed out). It could be a bug in the program or (maybe?) an incompati

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

On 02/25/2014 03:00 AM, Tom Ehlert wrote: When I run the defrag program on my dos machine, It does not allow me to do a full defrag. The options are limited (grayed out). On that machine, I am running freedos and for a command processor, 4dos. FAT32 was created by a windows o/s before I bought

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag program issue

> When I run the defrag program on my dos machine, It does not allow me to > do a full defrag. The options are limited (grayed out). > On that machine, I am running freedos and for a command processor, > 4dos. FAT32 was created by a windows o/s before I bought it. I have > since removed windo

[Freedos-user] defrag program issue

When I run the defrag program on my dos machine, It does not allow me to do a full defrag. The options are limited (grayed out). On that machine, I am running freedos and for a command processor, 4dos. FAT32 was created by a windows o/s before I bought it. I have since removed window (xp?).

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag abhores windows

Actually you will have to disable all DPMI hosts completely, HDPMI=16384 will only switch the whining from Windaube to DPMI :-( -- Own the Future-Intel® Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013 Rise to greatness in Intel's independ

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag abhores windows

> a Freedos 32bit defrag program for DOS FreeDOS DEFRAG is NOT a 32-bit program, but it should support FAT28 (at your own risk). > DOS (7.0 for 32 bit file system Where did you get it? > How is defrag deciding that it is running under Windows > (when it really is not)? The detection indeed is

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag abhores windows

Hi, On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:35 AM, John Sowden wrote: > > I just downloaded defrag.exe, a Freedos 32bit defrag program for DOS. It's not 32-bit at all, AFAICT, only a 16-bit MZ DOS .exe compiled by Turbo C++ (though seems to have some support for building with OpenWatcom as well). Latest ver

[Freedos-user] defrag abhores windows

I just downloaded defrag.exe, a Freedos 32bit defrag program for DOS. Unfortunately, I received the immediate notice in RED that it will not run under windows, a reasonable declaration. Unfortunately, neither of the two computers that I ran defrag on was running Windows: 1) On computer #1, Win

Re: [Freedos-user] Defrag broken...

On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 15:37 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I'm wondering if anyone is fixing the defrag that comes with freedos 1.0? > > I'm curious as I want to to try and fix it myself if noone else is. > > If anyone can help me understand what is wrong with it or connect with me > with effo

Re: [Freedos-user] Defrag broken...

Hi, sorry, I assume I can only reply via the list as rfc-ignorant would still blacklist me...? > when these efforts fail, they discourage both of us from trying > to filter out spam at all. I run my own mail server and the > recommendation I have run into is to use the whois.rfc-ignorant > black

Re: [Freedos-user] Defrag broken...

Hi! > I'm wondering if anyone is fixing the defrag... I was going to answer that question, but Michael's email provider says that rfc-ignorant.org says that the domain .de is not giving enough WHOIS information unless you specify some "yes I do want that data" flags in the query. Oh yeah. I wond

[Freedos-user] Defrag broken...

I'm wondering if anyone is fixing the defrag that comes with freedos 1.0? I'm curious as I want to to try and fix it myself if noone else is. If anyone can help me understand what is wrong with it or connect with me with efforts to fix it, I'd appreciate that. Michael Robinson ---

[Freedos-user] defrag version 1.0

Hello. Why defrag version 1.0 so slow? He take 43 minutes for full optimization of 542,687,232 bytes disk, where 219,430,912 bytes is unused space. -- Take care. Your friend, dima <7509107*mail,ru> <2:550/112> - Take Surveys

Re: [Freedos-user] Defrag 1.21 Full Optimization Problems

After FDOS folder was moved from drive C to drive D Defrag's full optimization works ok. There are only four files (and no folders) left on drive C: - kernel.sys - command.com - fdconfig.sys - fdauto.bat Drastic solution but very effective. I made drive D visible from WinXP so it can be def

[Freedos-user] Defrag 1.21 Full Optimization Problems

Full optimization defrag doesn't work on my system. command line: DEFRAG /C C: /F /FO result: Undefined Problem Screenshot: http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/1486/10102006160335un9.png Lester PS: is there a way to capture a screen like that as a txt file? ---

[Freedos-user] defrag problems (fwd)

Hi all, forwarding a message from Imre. You should probably use DEFRAG 0.9 or older versions until the 1.x series is repaired. Eric -- Forwarded message -- > Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:15:23 + > Subject: [Freedos-devel] defrag problems Hi, It seems that the latest version o

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag for Fat32

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 01:47:29 -0800, you wrote: >http://www.sysinternals.com/files/defrag.zip >NTFS and FAT32 under NT 3.51 Under NT 3.51 that means you need WindowsNT ... >http://www.whitneyfamily.org/Hacks/Defrag/INTEL/Defrag.zip >Another one, claims to be more intelligent but quite slow. Also

Re: [Freedos-user] defrag for Fat32

http://www.sysinternals.com/files/defrag.zip NTFS and FAT32 under NT 3.51 http://www.whitneyfamily.org/Hacks/Defrag/INTEL/Defrag.zip Another one, claims to be more intelligent but quite slow. Florian Xaver wrote: Hi! There is no such program for (Free)DOS i think? Bye, Flo ---

[Freedos-user] defrag for Fat32

Hi! There is no such program for (Free)DOS i think? Bye, Flo -- --- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live

[Freedos-user] Defrag

Hello FreeDOS user list people.   I used the latest version of Defrag, v0.4x   I used FreeDOS defrag on my C: drive (full optimization), then used PC DOS 6.3 Defrag, and it was already defragged. That's one real world example of the use of FreeDOS defrag. It worked excellent on my C: drive.

Re: [Freedos-user] Defrag is very slowww

[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : Because you have a beta version wich is not optimized yet. I am working on making it a lot faster and am also in the process of fixing all the bugs. For the mean time, please use microsoft defrag. Imre On a laptop with 4Mb of RAM,defrag is very slow then MS-Defra

RE: [Freedos-user] Defrag is very slowww

Because you have a beta version wich is not optimized yet. I am working on making it a lot faster and am also in the process of fixing all the bugs. For the mean time, please use microsoft defrag. Imre > > >On a laptop with 4Mb of RAM,defrag is very slow then MS-Defrag. >Why is it too slow? >

[Freedos-user] Defrag is very slowww

On a laptop with 4Mb of RAM,defrag is very slow then MS-Defrag. Why is it too slow? --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Sleepycat Software Learn developer strategies Cisco, Motorola, Ericsson & Lucent use to deliver higher performing products fa