Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

What no DOS

 [1/9] from: rick_falls:hotmai:l at: 31-Jan-2002 12:32


Hey why not a DOS version of REBOL. With the small footprint of REBOl core I could dust off and make use of my old 486PC. And REBOl is way easier than Qbasic.

 [2/9] from: chris:starforge:demon at: 31-Jan-2002 13:04


rick falls wrote:
> > Hey why not a DOS version of REBOL. With the small footprint of REBOl > core I could dust off and make use of my old 486PC. And REBOl is way > easier than Qbasic.
Why not use a cut down linux distro and use one of the linux versions of REBOL? Chris -- .------{ http://www.starforge.co.uk }-----. .--------------------------. =[ Explorer2260, Designer and Coder \=\ P: TexMaker, ROACH, site \ =[___You_will_obey_your_corporate_masters___]==[ Stack: EETmTmTRRSS------ ]

 [3/9] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 31-Jan-2002 14:18


rick falls wrote:
> Hey why not a DOS version of REBOL. With the small footprint of REBOl core I > could dust off and make use of my old 486PC. And REBOl is way easier than > Qbasic.
I know that DOS is easier to use than Linux, but well, it is 16bit. And ... I can hardly imagine RT would put their effort into DOS View version :-) -pekr-

 [4/9] from: bwilson:ihpva at: 31-Jan-2002 10:29


I think DOS has a small footprint because it lacks features that would allow REBOL to run, like a reliable network stack and multitasking. Shake the dust off the PC and run linux on it, it should be fine. I ran linux for years on a 486 w/ 16MB and a 250 MB hd. Hey, but what about this old Kaypro? How about a CP/M version? ;-) On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Petr Krenzelok wrote:
> > rick falls wrote: > > > Hey why not a DOS version of REBOL. With the small footprint of REBOl core I > > could dust off and make use of my old 486PC. And REBOl is way easier than > > Qbasic.
Brian

 [5/9] from: chalz:earthlink at: 31-Jan-2002 13:46


Heh. I don't think a DOS version of View would be necessary at all. I mean, while I love Windows (that's right, you heard me: I LOVE Windows!!), sometimes I just feel at home in a console. Course, I've been using various personal computers for about 18 years now (and I'm only 24..), since the Commodore Vic20. I still don't like Linux much, but I DO like QNX RTP 6 - but it's a real-time OS with, uh, no real memory cache, so it doesn't really run on a 486 (among other reasons). However, what I *have* done is to install CygWin, which is quite yummy I think. Too bad there's no /core for it, though ;) **** rick falls wrote:
> Hey why not a DOS version of REBOL. With the small footprint of REBOl core I > could dust off and make use of my old 486PC. And REBOl is way easier than > Qbasic.
I know that DOS is easier to use than Linux, but well, it is 16bit. And ... I can hardly imagine RT would put their effort into DOS View version :-) -pekr- -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .

 [6/9] from: rick_falls::hotmail::com at: 31-Jan-2002 18:46


Ok...OK.. It's just that there is a lot of people who know DOS and have access to it, MS-DOS or FreeDOS.I can't seem tp find my CP/M disks ;-)

 [7/9] from: chalz:earthlink at: 31-Jan-2002 14:34


Yeah, but who really develops for DOS anymore anyways? No networking, 16-bit environment, 8.3 filenames, no threading...? And beware most Linux distributions these days anyways. They LIKE to install a LOT of stuff now. I'm not looking for a debate here - I'm just talking from personal experience. In '93, I installed Slackware, and .. well, the installation was slow and annoying, I had to keep flipping through floppies because of a lack of HD space, and I had to cautiously select each little piece I wanted. A couple years ago I installed Mandrake, using their own installation program, and.. well, good luck installing it without a GUI! It kept forcing me to install a ton of crap I didn't need/want at all. Ended up with >1GB of space taken up :( Mostly from selecting this thing, and being told that it needed 50 other 'dependencies'... *shrugs* Just warning. **** Ok...OK.. It's just that there is a lot of people who know DOS and have access to it, MS-DOS or FreeDOS.I can't seem tp find my CP/M disks ;-)
>From: Brian Wilson <[bwilson--ihpva--org]> >Reply-To: [rebol-list--rebol--com]
<<quoted lines omitted: 22>>
>[rebol-request--rebol--com] with "unsubscribe" in the >subject, without the quotes.
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [rebol-request--rebol--com] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .

 [8/9] from: bwilson:ihpva at: 31-Jan-2002 18:43


On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, [chalz--earthlink--net] wrote:
> And beware most Linux distributions these days anyways. They LIKE > to install a LOT of stuff now. I'm not looking for a debate here -
A default Redhat 7.2 install forced me to use a min. 2 GB /usr partition. Mandrake ships code compiled for a 586 processor. To set up a tiny REBOL system, it would be easiest to start with a tiny distribution, like one designed for embedded systems or the LRP (Linux Router Project). -- Brian Wilson Santa Rosa, California 707-576-7649

 [9/9] from: chris:starforge:demon at: 1-Feb-2002 10:58


Brian Wilson wrote:
> To set up a tiny REBOL system, it would be easiest to start with a tiny > distribution, like one designed for embedded systems or the LRP (Linux > Router Project).
Linux From Scratch is even better, but to use that you do need to know your way around Linux with only the most basic tools at your disposal - if you want anything else you have to add it yourself. Chris -- .------{ http://www.starforge.co.uk }-----. .--------------------------. =[ Explorer2260, Designer and Coder \=\ P: TexMaker, ROACH, site \ =[___You_will_obey_your_corporate_masters___]==[ Stack: EETmTmTRRSS------ ]

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted