Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

HEXABOOT (Announce) (Announce)

posted by Torsten(R), 31.07.2017, 00:20
(edited by Torsten on 31.07.2017, 15:55)

Valuable feedback, Rugxulo!

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017, Rugxulo wrote:
>FreeDOS alone would probably work fine
Is set up as the default system. Several developers still consider
MS-DOS 7.x as the default target. DosWin32 usually only starts on this
one, though it works fine with IBM DOS 5.02. But Iouri Kharon had
ceased development five years ago, and recommended using HX instead.

>Probably should've grabbed a percentage of total RAM found
Would effectively be a better setting, but Jack R. Ellis' RDISK doesn't
have such routine in it's few hundreds bytes of code. Or did I miss it?

Another objective was to permit to evaluate a feature of Daniela Engert's
DaniS506.add driver for OS/2, UIDE.SYS' counterpart. DaniS506 stores it's
initialisation messages in memory, the "COPY <devicename>$ CON" command
recalls them at runtime. The more, she had ported the GNU hdparm tool.
For example, innvoking "DISKINFO CV" (new name) shows total operations,
error count and other information. DISKINFO's sources in
Would be nice if some of these features could be implemented in UIDE.SYS.

>working packet drivers for native hardware are hard to find these days.
I didn't test
on _native_ hardware (ought to work here, does it?).
Switched from tinyer E100B.DOS (33 KB resident) to E1000 for the sake of
compatibility. While QEMU emulates PRO/100, VirtualBox doesn't. The setup
should be compatible with as many emulations as possible.

[HX' Win32 emulation issue in secondary shells]
>I'm not sure I understand, but can you try "EMM386 PIC=ON"?
Is set up, for multitasking. Any other flavor uses UMBPCI.
To reproduce the issue: launch FAR 1.70 or FC/W 2.20 in DOS/HX. Try to
execute another Win32 text mode binary from the command line. In certain
cases, a "relocs stripped, cannot load" message will appear, while the
same binaries run fine when started from the command line alone.

[LFN enabled 4DOS build]
>Wasn't it already LFN-aware (if you added a setting in the .INI)?
Works with MS-DOS >= 7.1 only.
Apologies: forgot to add my build's diff against Rexx Conn's sources
(diminuitive change, just REMms the DOS version check).

>why aren't you using latest 8.00?
I appreciate Lucho's great work!
Decided to create a LFN enabled 7.50 for several reasons, however:
1. Rexx told me to do so.
2. 8.00 is 25 % bigger than 7.50. DR-DOS'/FreeDOS'/MS-DOS' COMMAND.COMs
all support LFNs, only IBM's doesn't. 7.50 was the smallest alternative.
3. Lucho had used less known development tools.
4. Wanted to stay as close as possible to Rexx' original. His last build
does _not_ match the released sources, however. The famous TYPE issue
still exists. Currently use "TYPE=*TYPE /P" as workaround. Back-porting
Lucho's fix would be more consistent.

>You can find 2.9.0 [...] at .
Stefan didn't succeed in providing required import functions (his BCRYPT.DLL
and DMWAPI.DLL january builds won't fill the gap). So, 2.7.0 2016-09-03 is
the very latest one which runs in WinNT 5.1. I'm not interested in any more
recent (i.e. bigger) version, but thought about re-compiling 2.7.0 to make
it run on WinNT 4.0 instead. I encountered conditions where 2.7.0 failed. usually works fine.
The mentioned 1.1.0 and 2.0.0 were from OpenSuSE and Ubuntu repositories.

>[Try TSRCOM's MARK/RELEASE,] if you like to live dangerously.
Heavens, no!

>VBox and QEMU can use PCNTPK [Am79x lance]
Better intersection than i8254x, indeed!

>Then mTCP (FTP, IRCJR), Wget, Links2, etc. all work fine.
Michael Brutman does a serious work, it comes with outstanding
documentation. The more, I really miss a PING, or even a HOST utility
in DOS (as present in Linux or OS/2, lacks in Win).
Just preferred to maintain only one single configuration file (WATTCP.CFG).
HX ports of PING, HOST and WHOIS would be great.

>[legal issues]
Words of wisdom.
I removed the link's target, it's no longer valid. Sorry for this.

>I don't think such a disclaimer is enough
I was misguided by the statement
"About the Copyright: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the
material on this page is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for
research, criticism, news reporting and comment purposes."
No interest in testing whether this really applies, in the U.S. and/ or
other countries.

>[Japheth] hope he's resting fine
Didn't try hard enough to learn about his fate. I.e., up to now, no
saved information on this. Trying further ...

Thank you for your recommendations


Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
15095 Postings in 1355 Threads, 245 registered users, 14 users online (0 registered, 14 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum