From owner-freebsd-emulation  Mon May  5 13:32:52 1997
Return-Path: <owner-emulation>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA17980
          for emulation-outgoing; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fps.biblos.unal.edu.co ([168.176.37.11])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA17831
          for <emulation@FreeBSD.ORG>; Mon, 5 May 1997 13:30:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost by fps.biblos.unal.edu.co (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA15558; Mon, 5 May 1997 15:30:44 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 15:30:44 -0500 (EST)
From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
To: Jonathan Mini <j_mini@efn.org>
Cc: emulation@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Report on DOSCMD
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.95.970505123058.636A-100000@garcia.efn.org>
Message-Id: <Pine.A41.3.95.970505145208.15252A-100000@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Most of the things I tested worked fine, even with the nasty messages
around, AT-Matlab should never run, DOSSHELL should. Probably MS-DOS is
the most "unpolite" OS around.
I hesitated before posting my personal list because I didn't want anyone
to think doscmd was buggy. DOScmd, in its present state is VERY useful, I
was impressed that I ran those commands without booting, and in an
independent X window without even being near to a crash. I'm even tempted
to start a new ports branch :-). 
I see a great future here. My wishlist for doscmd is:
1) Being able to run pcemu-like apps without booting.
2) Being able to run dosemu-like (32-bits) apps when booting.
For VM86:
1) Being able to run Minix-386 under VM86 (it runs in protected mode).

That would be a "super-emulator" :-)

regards,

Pedro.


On Mon, 5 May 1997, Jonathan Mini wrote:

> On Mon, 5 May 1997, Jonathan Mini wrote:
> 
> Heh. This is what I get for writing email in a public lab -- I never
> mention ed the point. Which was that those errors are "proper" -- they
> should be there, since the service being probed isn't there. Unless doscmd
> become some sort of super-emulator that emulates every strange sort of
> protocol ever outdated or obseleted, (got I hope not, some of them were
> nasty) we will always see errors like that.
> 
> > On Mon, 5 May 1997, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
> > 
> > Interestingly enough, most of those "unknown interrupts" are the programs
> > probing for services that doscmd does not support.
> >   Querying for services in DOS is not a polite process, and the
> > application expects an error like that so it assumes the service isn't
> > avialable. =)
> > 
> > > Howdy,
> > > The doscmd is great, I stood up all day testing all the DOS 5.0 programs
> > > I could find. I'm attaching my report, if you guys need more detailed
> > > debugging please tell me and I'll help as I can.
> > > The OpenDOS source code is also available at:
> > > http://www.caldera.co.uk/
> > > 
> > > best regards,
> > > 
> > > 	Pedro.
> > > 
> > 
> > Jonathan Mini (j_mini@efn.org)
> > 
> > ... Desolation ... Despair ... Plastic Forks ...
> > 
> 
> Jonathan Mini (j_mini@efn.org)
> 
> ... Desolation ... Despair ... Plastic Forks ...
> 
>