GNUDOS a better DOS than DOS
A. Valente
This is an open question I would like to ask (probably posted to completely the
wrong forum).
Has anyone, for example GNU et al ever considered writing a Public Domain DOS?
We have seen Linux, CP/M, and more 1980's home computer emulators than I can even
remember, but in all of this, no-one has tried to do DOS.
It is probably possible? Say by taking as the baseline the features of a former
DOS such as 3.3 and working towards that.
Any comments or ideas post them here.
Tony V.
Richard Hatch
A. Valente <a...@isds9.nd.rl.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>Has anyone, for example GNU et al ever considered writing a Public Domain DOS?
Have you taken a look at 4DOS by JPSoft? It is FTPable from just about
anywhere. The newest version out is 5.0d.
Good Luck,
Richard
--
| Richard Hatch | rha...@ringer.cs.utsa.edu |
| Computer Science major | rha...@runner.jpl.utsa.edu |
| Univerity of Texas at San Antonio | rha...@lonestar.utsa.edu |
| Direct last resort e-mail to: | rha...@ephsa.sat.tx.us |
Roger Maynard
>In article <2ne69u$2c...@unixfe.rl.ac.uk>,
>A. Valente <a...@isds9.nd.rl.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>Has anyone, for example GNU et al ever considered writing a Public Domain DOS?
>Have you taken a look at 4DOS by JPSoft? It is FTPable from just about
>anywhere. The newest version out is 5.0d.
Actually 4dos is not a dos at all but is only a command interpreter that
replaces command.com. However it is excellent especially if you are doing
a lot of batch programming or using an older dos.
As for public domain dos...why?
cordially, as always,
rm
--
Roger Maynard
may...@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
A. Valente
As for a public domain DOS, why not.
One could argue just the same about a public domain UNIX.
Plus I suspect there would be a user base out there for a good 'fremen' PD DOS
which did not come out of the great houses; House Microsoft and House Novell...
regards
Tony V
A. Valente
You misunderstand my post.
What I suggest is not an add-on to an existing DOS but a totally clean room
created Public Domain Disk Operating System which would run MS-DOS N-DOS
software. Implemented on an Intel based PC.
Regards
Tony V.
Sens, M.C.
Brian Collins
: >Has anyone, for example GNU et al ever considered writing a Public Domain DOS?
I agree. It is definately time for a PD "DOS Like" Operating System to
come into existence. I would hope though that the implementers would make
it a full 32 bit OS, and remove the segmented memory restrictions. It would
be a unix clone underneath with a dos interface? Of course this leads into
the the idea of what will the Power PC Operating System be like when it
comes out this fall? The Power Mac OS looks like it sucks to me, I hope
they do better with the Power PC OS. Cheers...
RAMBO
A. Valente
I get the impression from your post that you would loke to see a UNIX with a DOS
shell, my suggestion is not for a "DOS Like" Operating System but a "DOS
Compatible" Operating System. Capable of running all those DOS apps we love to
hate. The ultimate test of such an OS would be the ability to run Windows 3.1.
As for the segmented memory model etc, it would be nice but could you keep 100%
compatibility with all existing DOS Apps?
The time is coming when everything will go Chicago and I suspect a lot of users
of 'old' apps will be left high and dry. A PD DOS could be the saving of these
folks.
Regards
Tony V.
JAMES HALL
> As for public domain dos...why?
I would be interested in looking at a public domain DOS if and only if
it was capable of actively multitasking *without* having to run
something like Windows. i.e. I'd like to see multitasking in a DOS
kernel. Things like Linux do this, and the DOS kernel is much simpler
than the UNIX kernel, as I understand.
Other components to such a pd DOS such as breaking the 640k limit
could be tackled, but my big gripe with DOS has been the lack of
multitasking at the DOS command line level. With a multitasking DOS,
I might just migrate back to DOS from Linux (a powerful statement!)
(Yes, I know that Win4.0 will do multitasking by itself and doesn't
need DOS, but that's different that my statement.)
Any takers?
Eric Noel
>Roger Maynard said:
>> As for public domain dos...why?
>
>I would be interested in looking at a public domain DOS if and only if
>it was capable of actively multitasking *without* having to run
>something like Windows. i.e. I'd like to see multitasking in a DOS
>kernel. Things like Linux do this, and the DOS kernel is much simpler
>than the UNIX kernel, as I understand.
>
>Other components to such a pd DOS such as breaking the 640k limit
>could be tackled, but my big gripe with DOS has been the lack of
>multitasking at the DOS command line level. With a multitasking DOS,
>I might just migrate back to DOS from Linux (a powerful statement!)
>
Its been done, but not for free...
Both Datalight and Genreal Software have Dos lookalikes. One of them (maybe
both), I believe General Software, is reentrant and can run threads. I don't
remember if their command processor allows background processes though.
Both Datalight and General Software are aimed towards the embedded market.
I'd sure like to see *any* PD Dos compatable! I think its a lot easier
said than done though...
JAMES HALL
: Roger Maynard said:
: > As for public domain dos...why?
: I would be interested in looking at a public domain DOS if and only if
: it was capable of actively multitasking *without* having to run
: something like Windows. i.e. I'd like to see multitasking in a DOS
: kernel. Things like Linux do this, and the DOS kernel is much simpler
: than the UNIX kernel, as I understand.
: Other components to such a pd DOS such as breaking the 640k limit
: could be tackled, but my big gripe with DOS has been the lack of
: multitasking at the DOS command line level. With a multitasking DOS,
: I might just migrate back to DOS from Linux (a powerful statement!)
I am looking at my post from Friday and I realize that some people may
not take this the way I meant it. All I really want from DOS, and I
think many others agree, is multitasking... DOSSHELL gives you
swapping of tasks (put one task to sleep and launch another) but I
would like multitasking (running more than one process at one time.)
However, I have three 8088 machines at my Dad's place which I lend out
from time to time, so in that respect, I'd like to see a version of a
GNUDOS that runs on 32bit processors (multitasks) and one that runs on
lower processors (doesn't multitask).
As far as breaking the 'limit of 640k', that is something that can be
tackled *later*. Maybe a better memory manager that is easy to
configure, but the 640k limit is still okay since I don't have any
programs that would like to run 640k+.
So, my minimum request list for anyone working on such as system:
multitask for machines that can support it
DOS commands are actually programs (i.e. DIR, COPY, ...)
nicer command shell more like 4DOS shell (if structure, ...)
Jaroslaw Rafa
: I get the impression from your post that you would loke to see a UNIX with a DOS
: shell, my suggestion is not for a "DOS Like" Operating System but a "DOS
: Compatible" Operating System. Capable of running all those DOS apps we love to
: hate. The ultimate test of such an OS would be the ability to run Windows 3.1.
: As for the segmented memory model etc, it would be nice but could you keep 100%
: compatibility with all existing DOS Apps?
If it were a DOS with builtin DPMI support, why not?
Regards,
Jaroslaw Rafa
sfr...@lfs.cyf-kr.edu.pl