Quantcast

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
From: dmccunney <[hidden email]>

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dale E Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I see that someone on Ebay is selling an HP mini
> with a FREEDOS os installed. All the HP minis that
> I've seen have wifi & bluetooth built in. That would
> mean an 802.11 client to do it. The ad doesn't
> mention wifi or bluetooth but every mini that I've seen
> has it.

The machine may have the *hardware*.  Whether the hardware will be
*usable* will depend on software.

MSDOS was written back before Wifi and Bluetooth *existed*.  FreeDOS
tries to be compatible with MSDOS, which means "support for what
existed when MSDOS was current."

I would *not* expect Wifi or Bluetooth to be usable on the machine in
FreeDOS, because the drivers don't exist.  If you want to use Wifi or
Bluetooth on that hardware, you'll need to install another OS that
supports them.  (Depending on exactly which HP mini model it is, there
might be a flavor of Linux that can do it.)
______
Dennis

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
From: dmccunney <[hidden email]>

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Dale E Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:
> With windows if your PC dies and you want to move
> to a dupicate and keep running - your out of luck.

Not really.  Been there, done that.

On my old, built-from components PC, I moved XP several times.  I made
changes to the underlying system and Windows wanted to reauthenticate.

The time before last, online authentication failed, and I wound up
speaking to a Microsoft rep. His concern was solely that I wasn't
trying to run the *same* copy of Windows on more than one machine at a
time.  "Nope.  Same physical machine.  I had a hardware failure and
had to get a new motherboard."  He got me authenticated.

The next time I had to do so, online authentication worked with no
issues - MS had made changes to the online authentication site, and
whatever made it fail before no longer bit.

> Windows ability to detect small changes is amazing -
> it just wants to stop.

Windows has an intimate relationship with the hardware.  It *is* an
OS.  If you *make* hardware changes, it will notice.  Whether it wants
to stop will depend on the hardware you changed.  Video cards, hard
drives, and RAM shouldn't cause a problem.  Motherboard changes will.
As far as Windows is concerned, that's a new machine.

> Win 7 is such a pain to deal with I think even DOS could beat it.

I've run Win7, and can't agree.  I was quite happy with Win7.  These
days, I run Win10, and I'm generally pleased with it.  (I run the Pro
version in both cases.)

It follows the "every *other* release of Windows is decent" pattern.
I avoided Vista like the plague, but was happy with Win7.  I avoided
8.1 but am generally pleased with Win10.

Of course, I have the hardware to properly support it, and know what I'm doing.

The current desktop is a replacement for a failed older one.  The
older one came with Win7, and I upgraded to Win10.  I'd done that on
three laptops with no issues.  The desktop was "new and different
Win10 BSODs - collect the whole set!", and I was.  The new machine is
rock solid and stable, but it's also faster and more powerful
hardware.  My conclusion was that the older machine could run Win7 but
wasn't really up to Win10, even though it would install without
issues.  (One annoying quirk was that it was a quad-core machine but
Win10 only saw two cores.  The Xeon CPU is used wasn't on the
"supported by Win10 list Intel maintains.  The i5-2400 in the new box
is, and Win10 sees and uses all four cores.)

Something like that happened in the Win Vista days.  MS wanted
everyone on Vista, but some of the hardware in the pipeline wasn't
really up to running it.  (Mostly, inadequate video.)  MS created a
new level of certification - Vista Capable - so hardware vendors could
put it on the box.  Jim Allchin, who was SVP in charge of Windows
development at the time, was livid.  He felt, correctly, that the
hardware would not provide a good experience for users and that MS
would get yet another black eye in the marketplace.  MS really should
have waited 6 months for a new generation of hardware that would
properly support Vista, but wanted to make XP go away.

> Every time I install new software it wants to be
> reauthenticated.

Win7?  That never happened here.  Are you sure it got properly
authenticated in the first place?

What new software triggers a request for reauthentication?
______
Dennis
https://plus.google.com/u/0/105128793974319004519

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: dmccunney <[hidden email]>

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Gregg Eshelman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Microsoft has done such things deliberately. I had a Compaq server with dual
> slot Xeon CPUs. XP (with a 1-2 CPU license) could be installed but no matter
> what, was only going to be allowed to use ONE CPU. Manually forcing the
> multi CPU HAL to install during setup (or after) would make it crash.
> Microsoft apparently told Compaq to fix their server BIOSes so that only
> Server versions of Windows would be allowed to access the full hardware
> capabilities. So I put 2000 Server on it and got rid of it.

That's not a surprise.  Desktop systems with dual CPUs were uncommon.
The assumption was that a dual-CPU machine was a server, and would
require a server version of Windows.

Finding a dual-CPU system in current days of multiple cores pretty
much requires server hardware.  I dealt professionally with Dell 1u
rack mount servers.  They came with dual CPUs, we installed 32GB RAM
(the max it would take), and spun up VMs under VMWare.  (Mostly
CentOS, but a bit of Windows in the mix.)

With multiple cores per CPU, the *need* to have more than one CPU drops.

> One thing I've been liking about 10 is that just about any Core 2 Duo or
> dual core AMD AM2 and later can run it pretty well, even with only 2 gig
> RAM. A socket 939 AMD, even dual core? Not so much. 10 is the first release
> of Windows to have lower minimum hardware requirements than its predecessor.
> Just got done putting it on a 2.4Ghz Thinkpad T61 with 4gig (and a BIOS
> modded to remove hardware whitelist and de-hobble SATA from being limited to
> version 1 speed), which I'd seriously be thinking about keeping if it had
> the 1920x1200 instead of 1680x1050 display.

I'd be reluctant to try to run Win10 in 2GB, though it's nice you can.
6GB RAM seems to be the sweet spot.  The current desktop has 8GB, but
can be expanded to 32GB by swapping in higher capacity RAM sticks.

> I doubt any previous version of Windows would run well, if at all, on
> hardware originally released 8~9 years prior.

Depends on the Windows flavor.  I have an ancient notebook - a Fujitsu
p2110 from 2001.  It was a pass along from a friend who had upgraded,
but didn't want to just throw it out.

It came to me with Windows XP SP2, and took 8 minutes to just *boot*,
and longer to do anything.

No surprise.  The machine had a 787mhz Transmeta Crusoe CPU (an early
attempt at a power saving design), an IDE4 HD, and a whopping 256 *MB*
of RAM, of which the CPU grabbed 16MB off the top for code morphing.
XP wanted 512MB, minimum, to think about running.

I swapped in a larger HD, repartitioned, reformatted, and installed
Win2K SP4, Ubuntu Linux, Puppy7 Linux, and FreeDOS, multi-booting via
grub2.  Win2K actually ran on the machine more or less acceptably,
especially after I stripped out everything loaded in startup that
*could* be dropped, and turned off the Windows Update service (saving
10MB RAM) because the machine wouldn't *get* updates.

Ubuntu was installed from Minimal CD to get a working CLI system, and
then pick-and-choose via apt-get.  Lxde provided a lightweight GUI.
Large apps were problematic, but that was disk I/O issues caused by
IDE4.  I didn't even try to run Firefox.  Puppy was intended for low
end hardware and ran well, but with the same caveats about big apps.
FreeDOS flew. :-)

It was mostly an exercise to see what performance I could wring out of
ancient hardware *without* throwing money at it.  Actual work happened
elsewhere.  It hasn't even been turned on in months.

> Need USB 3 and/or eSATA? Pop in an ExpressCard.

That's a future upgrade here.  The current machine is USB2, but
there's a four port USB3 card from about $25 that ill plug into the
mini PCI-e slot. Little I currently do really needs USB3, but it's an
easy add down the road.

> Put Classic Shell on, turn off all the stuff that phones home, set the
> window titlebars to a color instead of white (which Firefox ignores) and
> it's good to go.

I run Classic Shell here, and turned off the telemetry as well.

> If you've ever done anything with Windows 1.0 you should notice some
> similarities between it and the "Modern" UI. They both have non-overlapping
> tiles with active content, and there's this black bar across the bottom.
> Square corners everywhere (excepting the round ended buttons Apple sued MS
> over, square cornered buttons were made to satisfy Apple). Flat, saturated
> colors with a heavy emphasis on white, magenta, cyan and black. "3D"
> effects? Not there, just like Windows was through 3.0.
>
> Someone at MS has a bad case of nostalgia for Windows 1.0 running on a CGA
> monitor.

<grin>  I avoided the Metro UI, reasons why.

MS had the same dream that Ubuntu Linux had with their Unity desktop -
the same UI on any device the user ran.  But a UI suited for a tablet
where screen real estate is the scarce resource falls down in a big
monitor.  Win10 brought back the Start Menu, but fixed what wasn't
broken and moved stuff around.  Classic Shell to the rescue.
______
Dennis

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: Gregg Eshelman <[hidden email]>

--===============9114683600329317498==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
        boundary="----=_Part_4041716_965213120.1492638692923"
Content-Length: 7789

------=_Part_4041716_965213120.1492638692923
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Microsoft has done such things deliberately. I had a Compaq server with dual
slot Xeon CPUs. XP (with a 1-2 CPU license) could be installed but no matter
what, was only going to be allowed to use ONE CPU. Manually forcing the multi
CPU HAL to install during setup (or after) would make it crash.
Microsoft apparently told Compaq to fix their server BIOSes so that only Server
versions of Windows would be allowed to access the full hardware capabilities.
So I put 2000 Server on it and got rid of it.
One thing I've been liking about 10 is that just about any Core 2 Duo or dual
core AMD AM2 and later can run it pretty well, even with only 2 gig RAM. A
socket 939 AMD, even dual core? Not so much. 10 is the first release of Windows
to have lower minimum hardware requirements than its predecessor. Just got done
putting it on a 2.4Ghz Thinkpad T61 with 4gig (and a BIOS modded to remove
hardware whitelist and de-hobble SATA from being limited to version 1 speed),
which I'd seriously be thinking about keeping if it had the 1920x1200 instead
of 1680x1050 display. Need USB 3 and/or eSATA? Pop in an ExpressCard.

I doubt any previous version of Windows would run well, if at all, on hardware
originally released 8~9 years prior.

Put Classic Shell on, turn off all the stuff that phones home, set the window
titlebars to a color instead of white (which Firefox ignores) and it's good to
go.
If you've ever done anything with Windows 1.0 you should notice some
similarities between it and the "Modern" UI. They both have non-overlapping
tiles with active content, and there's this black bar across the bottom. Square
corners everywhere (excepting the round ended buttons Apple sued MS over,
square cornered buttons were made to satisfy Apple). Flat, saturated colors
with a heavy emphasis on white, magenta, cyan and black. "3D" effects? Not
there, just like Windows was through 3.0.

Someone at MS has a bad case of nostalgia for Windows 1.0 running on a CGA
monitor.

On Wednesday, April 19, 2017, 3:09:07 PM MDT, dmccunney
<[hidden email]> wrote:On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Dale E
Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:
> With windows if your PC dies and you want to move
> to a dupicate and keep running - your out of luck.

(One annoying quirk was that it was a quad-core machine but
Win10 only saw two cores.-a The Xeon CPU is used wasn't on the
"supported by Win10 list Intel maintains.-a The i5-2400 in the new box
is, and Win10 sees and uses all four cores.)

Something like that happened in the Win Vista days.-a MS wanted
everyone on Vista, but some of the hardware in the pipeline wasn't
really up to running it.-a (Mostly, inadequate video.)-a MS created a
new level of certification - Vista Capable - so hardware vendors could
put it on the box.-a Jim Allchin, who was SVP in charge of Windows
development at the time, was livid.-a He felt, correctly, that the
hardware would not provide a good experience for users and that MS
would get yet another black eye in the marketplace.-a MS really should
have waited 6 months for a new generation of hardware that would
properly support Vista, but wanted to make XP go away.
------=_Part_4041716_965213120.1492638692923
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head></head><body><div style="font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica,
Arial, sans-serif;font-size:small;"><div><div>Microsoft has done such things
deliberately. I had a Compaq server with dual slot Xeon CPUs. XP (with a 1-2
CPU license) could be installed but no matter what, was only going to be
allowed to use ONE CPU. Manually forcing the multi CPU HAL to install during
setup (or after) would make it crash.<br></div></div><div>Microsoft apparently
told Compaq to fix their server BIOSes so that only Server versions of Windows
would be allowed to access the full hardware capabilities. So I put 2000 Server
on it and got rid of it.</div><div><br></div><div>One thing I've been liking
about 10 is that just about any Core 2 Duo or dual core AMD AM2 and later can
run it pretty well, even with only 2 gig RAM. A socket 939 AMD, even dual core?
Not so much. 10 is the first release of Windows to have lower minimum hardware
requirements than its predecessor. Just got done putting it on a 2.4Ghz
Thinkpad T61 with 4gig (and a BIOS modded to remove hardware whitelist and
de-hobble SATA from being limited to version 1 speed), which I'd seriously be
thinking about keeping if it had the 1920x1200 instead of 1680x1050 display.
Need USB 3 and/or eSATA? Pop in an ExpressCard.<br></div><div><br></div><div>I
doubt any previous version of Windows would run well, if at all, on hardware
originally released 8~9 years prior.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Put Classic
Shell on, turn off all the stuff that phones home, set the window titlebars to
a color instead of white (which Firefox ignores) and it's good to
go.</div><div><br></div><div>If you've ever done anything with Windows 1.0 you
should notice some similarities between it and the "Modern" UI. They both have
non-overlapping tiles with active content, and there's this black bar across
the bottom. Square corners everywhere (excepting the round ended buttons Apple
sued MS over, square cornered buttons were made to satisfy Apple). Flat,
saturated colors with a heavy emphasis on white, magenta, cyan and black. "3D"
effects? Not there, just like Windows was through
3.0.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Someone at MS has a bad case of nostalgia for
Windows 1.0 running on a CGA monitor.<br></div><div><br></div><div
id="ydpe47c0fc0ydp634737eyahoo_quoted_3014078887"
class="ydpe47c0fc0ydp634737eyahoo_quoted" data-class="yahoo_quoted
ydp634737eyahoo_quoted"><div>On Wednesday, April 19, 2017, 3:09:07 PM MDT,
dmccunney &lt;[hidden email]&gt; wrote:</div><div><div dir="ltr">On
Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Dale E Sterner &lt;<a shape="rect"
href="mailto:[hidden email]" rel="nofollow"
target="_blank">[hidden email]</a>&gt; wrote:<br clear="none">&gt; With
windows if your PC dies and you want to move<br clear="none">&gt; to a dupicate
and keep running - your out of luck.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">(One
annoying quirk was that it was a quad-core machine but<br clear="none">Win10
only saw two cores.&nbsp; The Xeon CPU is used wasn't on the<br
clear="none">"supported by Win10 list Intel maintains.&nbsp; The i5-2400 in the
new box<br clear="none">is, and Win10 sees and uses all four cores.)<br
clear="none"><br clear="none">Something like that happened in the Win Vista
days.&nbsp; MS wanted<br clear="none">everyone on Vista, but some of the
hardware in the pipeline wasn't<br clear="none">really up to running it.&nbsp;
(Mostly, inadequate video.)&nbsp; MS created a<br clear="none">new level of
certification - Vista Capable - so hardware vendors could<br clear="none">put
it on the box.&nbsp; Jim Allchin, who was SVP in charge of Windows<br
clear="none">development at the time, was livid.&nbsp; He felt, correctly, that
the<br clear="none">hardware would not provide a good experience for users and
that MS<br clear="none">would get yet another black eye in the
marketplace.&nbsp; MS really should<br clear="none">have waited 6 months for a
new generation of hardware that would<br clear="none">properly support Vista,
but wanted to make XP go away.</div></div></div></div></body></html>
------=_Part_4041716_965213120.1492638692923--


--===============9114683600329317498==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
--===============9114683600329317498==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--===============9114683600329317498==--

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: dmccunney <[hidden email]>

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.

Where did you get the copy of Win7 you installed?

> The laptop doesn't have an internet connection so had to use the
> phone method.to  Install it.

Are you certain that worked correctly?

> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.

What software was this?

> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
> or it would shut down forever.

Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?

> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.

I'm afraid my take from here is pilot error.  When you don't actually
know what you're doing, problems arise.

You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
and better understand what your options are.

Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.

> cheers
> DS
______
Dennis

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: Rugxulo <[hidden email]>

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.
>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.
>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
>> or it would shut down forever.
>
> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?

Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is that
not supported any longer?

>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.

In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a good
long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates or
fixes.)

> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
> and better understand what your options are.

I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, etc.)
would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably thinks
emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of default
ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there (battery
life?).

A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as one
guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today (but
I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).

Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or slow,
but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking actually,
and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
buggy, but we can dream, can't we?   ;-)

> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.

Shooting your foot off? Yes, C++17 was finalized recently.   :-))

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: Karen Lewellen <[hidden email]>

Granted I am not commenting on the exact post, too much  to locate it
exactly.
still, speaking only for myself, I have continued to build upon and find
dos solutions  without having to change operating systems for almost 30
years now.  My choice  to think first about solutions instead of thinking I
could not advance has yet to fail me.
I am surprised on a list dedicated to a Dos program  at how often I read
people suggest going to use something else laughs.
I cannot speak to other  people's computing, but is not that why we
call them personal computers in the first place?
Kare


On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Rugxulo wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.
>>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.
>>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
>>> or it would shut down forever.
>>
>> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?
>
> Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is that
> not supported any longer?
>
>>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
>>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.
>
> In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a good
> long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates or
> fixes.)
>
>> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
>> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
>> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
>> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
>> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
>> and better understand what your options are.
>
> I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, etc.)
> would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
> similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably thinks
> emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
> support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of default
> ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there (battery
> life?).
>
> A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as one
> guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
> ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today (but
> I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).
>
> Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
> Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or slow,
> but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking actually,
> and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
> course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
> buggy, but we can dream, can't we?   ;-)
>
>> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.
>
> Shooting your foot off? Yes, C++17 was finalized recently.   :-))
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Freedos-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: dmccunney <[hidden email]>

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Rugxulo <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, dmccunney <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Dale E Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> I installed win 7 on a laptop to see what it could do but not to use it.
>>> I installed software that I bought to see what it  would do on win 7.
>>> A lot of of message boxes came up giving me 24 hours to reactive
>>> or it would shut down forever.
>>
>> Did those messages come from Win7 or the software you installed?
>
> Can't you use a RC (release candidate) for a few months? Or is that
> not supported any longer?

If what you *have* is a Release Candidate, maybe.  (I have no idea if
it is still supported.)

>>> I left the test software on being affraid that if I removed it, it would
>>> do it again. Win 7 is now on my junk software list.
>
> In fairness, Win7 doesn't have a lot of life left, so it's not a good
> long-term solution. (Vista very recently died, so no more updates or
> fixes.)

Win7 is no longer under active development. It *will* get Extended
Support (IE, security updates) till 2020, but MS would really like you
to move to Win10.

The bigger longer term problem is that each new release of Windows
adds new things to the Windows API, and as time passes, software will
expect that new stuff and fail to run on systems that don't have it.
I have an ancient notebook running Win2K Pro that can't run some stuff
I use elsewhere because it requires XP minimum.  There are already
things that require Win7 minimum and won't run on my XP Home netbook.

There are reasons I prefer to stay current on Windows...

>> You got DOS and DOS apps in the old days, got them to where you
>> wanted, and stopped.  If what you have does what you need, splendid.
>> If it doesn't, you are looking at stepping beyond DOS.  That will mean
>> either a flavor of Windows or a flavor of Linux.  Either way, there's
>> a learning curve you're stuck with, and you need to learn more about
>> and better understand what your options are.
>
> I can't help but wonder if a simple Chromebook (from Best Buy, etc.)
> would fit the bill for him (or me or others). But without QEMU or
> similar by default, it's probably less useful. Google probably thinks
> emulation would be overkill for the "light" tasks that Chromebooks
> support. You can "probably" install a full Ubuntu (instead of default
> ChromeOS), but I'm not sure of the potential tradeoffs there (battery
> life?).

That will depend on your needs.  Chromebooks explicitly assume you
have a fast internet connection and will store your data in the cloud.
If you have the first and are willing to do the latter, a Chromebook
can be a good fit.  If the answer is no to either of those questions,
think again.

And while there are options to install Ubuntu, you still face issues
of local storage capacity.  Battery like my not be your scarce
resource.

If I were to get a Chromebook, I wouldn't bother.  It's a platform to
connect to the Internet through broadband and do stuff via the Chrome
browser.  Stuff that can't be handled that way is Something Else's
Job.

(I can theoretically install Ubuntu on my Android tablet.  I have no
actual need to do so.  Android and the apps I have installed do what I
require.  Ubuntu won't add anything I need badly enough to justify the
effort of moving to it.)

> A lot of issues with old DOS software have to do with printing, as one
> guy on BTTR recently mentioned needing. Not sure what is perfectly
> ideal here (VDosPlus??). BTW, QEMU 2.9.0 was just released today (but
> I'm unaware of any relevant changes for us).

I have vDOSPlus here.  It's a possible solution for most print needs,
since you can configure what happens when you try to print from a DOS
app.  I never actually do, but I would redirect to a "printer" under
Windows that creates a PDF of what is sent to it, and print that using
standard Windows methods.

If you can *run* your DOS app in a virtual machine (which is
essentially what vDOS and predecessor DOSBox are), you can generally
find a way to actually print from the host OS. I very seldom need to
actually print *anything*, and largely don't care.

(I have several DOS apps and games running on my Android tablet
courtesy of an Android port of DOSBox.  One candidate for running that
way was Eric Meyer's DOS WordStar clone, VDE.  The problem was that
extant Android ports of DOSBox weren't passing control-key combos
through to the host OS, so WordStar <ctrl-key><key> assignments simply
weren't recognized.  I found a port that does let them through and VDE
runs fine.)

> Another long shot would be DOS emulation in the browser via
> Javascript. Normally I would shun that for being too buggy or slow,
> but there are TONS of Javascript emulators. It's shocking actually,
> and some are amazingly good (and network-aware), e.g. OpenRISC. Of
> course, DOS is not high priority, and copy.sh's V86 is still too
> buggy, but we can dream, can't we?   ;-)

Hardware is increasingly smaller, faster, and cheaper.  I've seen some
of the DOS emulators in JavaScript, and if you *have* decent hardware,
they perform surprisingly well.  As time goes on, you are more likely
to *have* decent hardware.

(I have also seen compilers that compile C to JaAvaScript.)

>> Proceeding without knowledge is a good way to shoot yourself in *both* feet.
>
> Shooting your foot off? Yes, C++17 was finalized recently.   :-))

Switch to Rust... :-)
______
Dennis
https://plus.google.com/u/0/105128793974319004519

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: Dan Schmidt <[hidden email]>

--===============2885374890722544653==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113c05a850355e054de294d9

--001a113c05a850355e054de294d9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Is this thread still about wireless for Dos?  If not, sorry for posting.

If so, I bought a wireless to ethernet bridge - smaller than a deck of
cards, runs on usb power - works great for my Dos machine.  I tried a wifi
card that supposedly supported dos - never could get it working, threw it
away in disgust.

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Dale E Sterner <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Ebay I purchased a cd with unreleased Corel dos
> software. There would have been a 5.6 version had it been
> released. Some woman got it from a boyfriend who
> worked for Corel and then sold it on Ebay for about $150.
> I was high bid.
>
> cheers
> DS
>
>
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 20:10:45 +0000 "Thomas Mueller" <[hidden email]>
> writes:
> > > I have Qpro 5.6 but haven't used it yet. Still using version 3
> > > The macros are powerful and a lot earier to use than
> > > Excel. Version 5.6 is said to have a solver built in
> > > like TK solver. One of these days I'll find out.
> >
> > > cheers
> > > DS
> >
> > Last Qpro version for DOS was 5.  Was there a 5.6?  DOS or Windows?
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > _______________________________________________
> > Freedos-user mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
> >
>
>
> ******************************************************>>>>
> >From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry
> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052
> *******************************************************>>>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Whatever Happened To Nancy Kerrigan?
> trend-chaser.com
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fcbbdf8c0f63bdf76f2st02duc
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Freedos-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>

--001a113c05a850355e054de294d9
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir="ltr">Is this thread still about wireless for Dos?-a If not, sorry for
posting. <br><br>If so, I bought a wireless to ethernet bridge - smaller than a
deck of cards, runs on usb power - works great for my Dos machine.-a I tried a
wifi card that supposedly supported dos - never could get it working, threw it
away in disgust. <br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div
class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Dale E Sterner <span
dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:[hidden email]"
target="_blank">[hidden email]</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">On Ebay I purchased a cd with unreleased Corel dos<br>
software. There would have been a 5.6 version had it been<br>
released. Some woman got it from a boyfriend who<br>
worked for Corel and then sold it on Ebay for about $150.<br>
I was high bid.<br>
<br>
cheers<br>
DS<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 20:10:45 +0000 &quot;Thomas Mueller&quot; &lt;<a
href="mailto:[hidden email]">[hidden email]</a>&gt;<br>
writes:<br>
<div><div class="h5">&gt; &gt; I have Qpro 5.6 but haven&#39;t used it yet.
Still using version 3<br>
&gt; &gt; The macros are powerful and a lot earier to use than<br>
&gt; &gt; Excel. Version 5.6 is said to have a solver built in<br>
&gt; &gt; like TK solver. One of these days I&#39;ll find out.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; cheers<br>
&gt; &gt; DS<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Last Qpro version for DOS was 5.-a Was there a 5.6?-a DOS or Windows?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Tom<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>-------------<br>
-----<br>
&gt; Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world&#39;s most<br>
&gt; engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! <a href="http://sdm.link/slashdot"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sdm.link/slashdot</a><br>
&gt; ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
&gt; Freedos-user mailing list<br>
&gt; <a href="mailto:[hidden email]">Freedos-user@lists.<wbr>sourceforge.net</a><br>
&gt; <a href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/<wbr>lists/listinfo/freedos-user</a><br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><span class="">******************************<wbr>************************&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;From Dale Sterner - MS organic chemistry<br>
<a href="http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00975a052" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/<wbr>10.1021/jo00975a052</a><br>
******************************<wbr>*************************&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<br>
</span>Whatever Happened To Nancy Kerrigan?<br>
<a href="http://trend-chaser.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">trend-chaser.com</a><br>
<a href="http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/58fcbbdf8c0f63bdf76f2st02duc"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.<wbr>com/TGL3141/<wbr>58fcbbdf8c0f63bdf76f2st02duc</a><br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>------------------<br>
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world&#39;s most<br>
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! <a href="http://sdm.link/slashdot"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sdm.link/slashdot</a><br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Freedos-user mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:[hidden email]">Freedos-user@lists.<wbr>sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/<wbr>lists/listinfo/freedos-user</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a113c05a850355e054de294d9--


--===============2885374890722544653==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
--===============2885374890722544653==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--===============2885374890722544653==--

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: WIFI on DOS (was: bsum - compute BSD checksums of yo

Karen Lewellen-2
In reply to this post by Karen Lewellen-2
From: Dan Schmidt <[hidden email]>

--===============8759580214405937345==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1140137c0b54bd054df6b1bf

--001a1140137c0b54bd054df6b1bf
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

That is a router, I can't guarantee it would work. (unless you put openwrt
on it)  However, this is built specifically to bridge:

https://www.amazon.com/IOGEAR-Universal-Ethernet-Adapter-GWU627/dp/B004UAKCS6

Takes around 20 seconds to connect, which is longer than it takes DOS to
boot on my machine.  (can be powered by usb)

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ulrich Hansen <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> > Am 24.04.2017 um 07:07 schrieb Dan Schmidt <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > Is this thread still about wireless for Dos?  If not, sorry for posting.
> >
> > If so, I bought a wireless to ethernet bridge - smaller than a deck of
> cards, runs on usb power - works great for my Dos machine.  I tried a wifi
> card that supposedly supported dos - never could get it working, threw it
> away in disgust.
>
> This sounds interesting. Is it something like this?
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TQEX8BO/ref=psdc_300189_t2_B00HZWOQZ6
> Thanks for the hint.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Freedos-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
>

--001a1140137c0b54bd054df6b1bf
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir="ltr"><div>That is a router, I can&#39;t guarantee it would work.
(unless you put openwrt on it)-a However, this is built specifically to
bridge:<br><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/IOGEAR-Universal-Ethernet-Adapter-GWU627/dp/B004UAKCS6">https://www.amazon.com/IOGEAR-Universal-Ethernet-Adapter-GWU627/dp/B004UAKCS6</a><br><br></div>Takes around 20 seconds to connect, which is longer than it takes DOS to boot on my machine.-a (can be powered by usb)<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Ulrich Hansen <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:[hidden email]" target="_blank">[hidden email]</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
&gt; Am 24.04.2017 um 07:07 schrieb Dan Schmidt &lt;<a
href="mailto:[hidden email]">[hidden email]</a>&gt;:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Is this thread still about wireless for Dos?-a If not, sorry for
posting.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; If so, I bought a wireless to ethernet bridge - smaller than a deck of
cards, runs on usb power - works great for my Dos machine.-a I tried a wifi
card that supposedly supported dos - never could get it working, threw it away
in disgust.<br>
<br>
</span>This sounds interesting. Is it something like this?<br>
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00TQEX8BO/ref=psdc_300189_t2_B00HZWOQZ6"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.amazon.com/dp/<wbr>B00TQEX8BO/ref=psdc_300189_t2_<wbr>B00HZWOQZ6</a><br>
Thanks for the hint.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>------------------<br>
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world&#39;s most<br>
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! <a href="http://sdm.link/slashdot"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sdm.link/slashdot</a><br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Freedos-user mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:[hidden email]">Freedos-user@lists.<wbr>sourceforge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/<wbr>lists/listinfo/freedos-user</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a1140137c0b54bd054df6b1bf--


--===============8759580214405937345==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
--===============8759580214405937345==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user

--===============8759580214405937345==--

--- Internet Rex 2.29
 * Origin: capcity2.synchro.net - 502/875-8938 (276:10/901)
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux ListGate 1.3
 *  Capitol City Online - Frankfort, KY - telnet://capitolcityonline.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Freedos-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Loading...