From: "Ofer Nave" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Funding DOS32 project by subscription? Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 11:02:26 -0700 Organization: Netcom Lines: 35 Message-ID: <7gva34$gm5@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com> References: <7gt7a4$rk3$1 AT vnetnews DOT value DOT net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lai-ca3-99.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Fri May 07 11:06:28 AM PDT 1999 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com M. Schulter wrote in message <7gt7a4$rk3$1 AT vnetnews DOT value DOT net>... >Since developing such a 32-bit POSIX-compatible DOS would be a very >nontrivial effort, how about a subscription effort to lend support to >the potential DJGPP-related developers (DJ and others)? >Might enough people be interested to underwrite such a significant >effort for a 32-bit CLI alternative combining the best of DOS and >POSIX, and ensuring that DJGPP has a free and _top quality_ DOS to run >on regardless of decisions by commercial OS developers? I thought FreeDOS and DR-DOS were respectable alternatives. With both of those available, is it really necessary to duplicate their effortsnd produce yet another DOS clone? Wouldn't it be more effective to direct people who want to improve DOS to join the FreeDOS team, since they are pretty much doing what you want already? (I think, but I'm not sure - I really haven't looked into FreeDOS much, I was going to settle on Caldera...) >The developers of DJGPP have already shown that they can produce >intricate programs with features often superior to those of commercial >releases: consider the extra pointer protection of CWSDPMI, for >example. Agreed. I've been very impressed. >(2) Are there enough DJGPP users and other 32-bit DOS enthusiasts who >would be ready to sponsor this project through a subscription? I would donate a little money and some effort if I felt it was necessary and worthwhile. -Ofer