On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Jim Hall wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Jerome E. Shidel Jr. <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Personally, I would like BASE to be more or less a minimum viable OS >> install and ALL to be a most likely >> wanted install. >> >> When I say minimum viable I mean: kernel, freecom, xcopy, deltree, move >> and a few other more or less >> absolutes. >> >> However, by my understanding of what Jim wants. BASE is supposed to be >> equivalent to to what >> was provided with MS-DOS. >> >> For us dev types, it is very easy to make a custom package set for FDI or >> to just >> roll your own installer. >> > > > > Yes, my view is that FreeDOS "Base" should provide the equivalent > functionality to MS-DOS. Anything else (Devel, Edit, Util, .. or "All" if > you group it into one set) is extra functionality that wasn't included in > the original MS-DOS. > > I think the important feature is that those who want just the "MS-DOS" > behavior can install only "Base" with the correspondingly small footprint, > while people who want a more modern DOS experience can install "All." > > > Jim >
I guess I have a sort of in the middle approach: "install something comparable to MS-DOS 3.3", "install something comparable to MS-DOS 6.2", "install everything" -uso. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
