On Sat, 24 Oct 2020, Random Liegh via Freedos-devel wrote:
<snip>
What DOS was, in my mind, was simple. You didn't really have an entire tree
with documents in one place, helpfiles in another and LSM files in a third.
You had -for MS DOS, c:\dos. Everything was there.
It's been a long time, but I think PC-DOS may have had some folders with help
files -so it was like DOS -> DOS\help or something? It's been ages and I
could be misremembering but that would still be simple enough for me.
PC DOS 7 had a couple folders with back-end stuff for the stuff IBM
licensed from Central Point, but that's about it, judging by how I have a
disk image set up in QEMU.
<snip>
Development; your decisions work for me. I never use perl on dos and I try to
avoid djgpp and GCC-IA16. I end up needing NASM, JWASM, OW, UPX and
FreeBASIC. Would it be possible to replace bwbasic with gw-basic?
<snip>
The open version of GW-BASIC only supports DOS 1.x APIs so far, for what
it's worth. The general consensus seems to be, it's not worth trying to
reconstitute that code...a shame. I'd like to see it reconstituted up to
3.2.
Then again, the question would be: Did M$ release 1.x because that's what
they wanted to release, or because that's all they could dig up? If the
latter, then disassembling or reconstituting the 3.23 source would be
legitimate. (And I have reason to suspect both are plausible.)
-uso.
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
