X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 09:51:49 +0200 Subject: Re: DOS 7.1 and DJGPP From: "Florian Xaver" Organization: http://www.drdos.org Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=utf-8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp References: <0JN7007YBGJQM9X0 AT mta2 DOT srv DOT hcvlny DOT cv DOT net> <200708230315 DOT l7N3FTQm022479 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <200708231506 DOT l7NF6uk9010312 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <1187911398 DOT 997594 DOT 40580 AT e9g2000prf DOT googlegroups DOT com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.21 (Linux) Lines: 49 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.46.26.29 X-Trace: 1187941908 newsreader01.highway.telekom.at 23941 62.46.26.29:13303 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:23:18 +0200, wrote: > On Aug 23, 10:06 am, DJ Delorie wrote: >> > Could you update this item with FreeDOS and Dr-DOS? Or a second item >> with >> > "DOS, which supports LFN"? >> >> Assuming you mean the zip picker, why? Does it change the list of >> things you need (mostly, cwsdpmi), or the installation instructions >> (mostly environment variables)? > > Yeah, the ZIP Picker still recommends 2.03p2 for XP, what gives? ;-) > > I think he meant which binaries are best for FreeDOS or DR-DOS (but I > could be wrong). DJGPP 2.04 beta has better support for FAT32 (e.g. > statfs, _creat, _open), and since EDR-DOS and FreeDOS support that, I > assume it would be the preferred version (unless you don't need such, > e.g. only using FAT12, FAT16 like me). Yes, this would be better, but there is no official release, so I don't think that DJ wants to add this item :-) > DR-DOS 7.03 works fine with DJGPP and its programs for me, but didn't > OpenDOS 7.01 (which EDR-DOS is based) have problems re: their DPMI > server? Anyways, CWSDPMI is better in some ways (swapping) and > *usually* most DJGPP programs were written for it (obviously not > FreeDOS' p7zip 4.42 compile, but anyways ...). So I would always > recommend getting it. > > "DOS, which supports LFN"? Sounds like he means Datalight ROM DOS > (which supposedly? supports LFNs natively). Or he could mean e.g. > FreeDOS w/ DOSLFN. Either way, don't most packages work in either > case? You only have to unzip to SFN form if you want to use under both > SFN and LFN modes, right? > > No extra environment variable changes are needed, AFAIK. > Yes, there is no problem...but for newbies it would be better if they would find FreeDOS, Enhanced Dr-DOS and Datalight ROM DOS in one item. Publicity is important. And little things like I wrote above big improvements for newbies. Other example: Sentences "Last update " at bottom of the pages are also very interesting for someone who looks for a compiler :-) Bye Flo