Message-Id: <200104191133.HAA09260@delorie.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 13:33:56 +0200
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
From: florianx <dos DOT fire AT aon DOT at>
Subject: RE: DOS issues #2
Organization: Club Dr-DOS www.drdos.org
X-Mailer: Opera 5.10 build 902
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

Hi!

>> I think the most serious problem with FreeDOS is that there
>> is only a handful of people, who have solid knowledge of
>> DOS internals. Developing a new DOS now implies the
>> serious risk that many of the known peculiarities in older
>> DOS issues and older DOS applications are long forgotten,
>> but by ignoring them, one will never be able to design and
>> develop a 100% compatible DOS...
>> 
>	[da Silva, Joe]  
>
>	You're quite right. That's why the DR-DOS kernel is
>	the most important thing to open-source. Most of the
>	utilities would not need such specialist knowledge,
>	nor require so much manpower ...

Yes... and the memory manager (emm386+dpms) and the taskmanager, I think.
Because FreeDOS f.e. will never have such a good memory manager. Only if QEMM and Desqview
would be opensource...but I don't think that this could ever happen.

Bye, flox