DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Devyn Collier Johnson]

Aloha DOSEMU Users!

I want to info everyone that DOSEMU has been released and is no longer 
abandonware. Feel free to contribute to the new DOSEMU team and help 
DOSEMU compete with DOSbox.

https://launchpad.net/dosemu-reborn

Mahalo,

Devyn Collier Johnson
DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Mateusz Viste]

Hi,

What makes yoou believe that DOSemu is 'abandonware' ?

Looking at the code repository I see a pretty intense activity.
http://sourceforge.net/p/dosemu/code/ci/8a7cad79ae6797ef4f36abea728903a4bc5a4cca/log/?path=

Sure, there was no public release for quite a while, but it's only a 
matter of packaging I guess.

Do you have any reasons to believe that forking a new branch of DOSemu 
would be more beneficial to the project than contributing to the already 
existing code base?

cheers,
Mateusz



On 07/09/2013 03:11 PM, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
> Aloha DOSEMU Users!
>
> I want to info everyone that DOSEMU has been released and is no longer
> abandonware. Feel free to contribute to the new DOSEMU team and help
> DOSEMU compete with DOSbox.
>
> https://launchpad.net/dosemu-reborn
>
> Mahalo,
>
> Devyn Collier Johnson
> DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Stas Sergeev]

09.07.2013 17:42, Mateusz Viste пишет:
> Hi,
>
> What makes yoou believe that DOSemu is 'abandonware' ?
Wikipedia. :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dosemu
Well, this mostly is true, because the releases
were not made (enough to call it abandonware),
but there were the unofficial releases to mitigate
the problem; both fedora and debian packages
do exist on the net.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Frantisek Hanzlik]

Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
> Aloha DOSEMU Users!
> 
> I want to info everyone that DOSEMU has been released and is no longer
> abandonware. Feel free to contribute to the new DOSEMU team and help
> DOSEMU compete with DOSbox.
> 
> https://launchpad.net/dosemu-reborn
> 
> Mahalo,
> 
> Devyn Collier Johnson
> DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com

DOSEMU isn't abandonware, You are perhaps not inform and not keep
track with it. DOSEMU evolves and bugs are solved - You can see
bug tracer. If You want help to further improve it, You can and IMO
will be welcome in its developer team - there is no need and perhaps
no reason fork it.
I remember case of wodim - unfortunate fork of cdrecord. Although
some distros was accepted this fork, wodim *was* (and maybe is still)
abandonware, moreover with lot of bugs and degraded functionality
contrary to original (well maintained) cdrecord. Thus I think, most
of forks are foolish and inefficient dissipation of energy and time.
-- 
My two cents, cheers,
Franta Hanzlik

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Stas Sergeev]

09.07.2013 17:11, Devyn Collier Johnson пишет:
> Aloha DOSEMU Users!
>
> I want to info everyone that DOSEMU has been released and is no longer 
> abandonware. Feel free to contribute to the new DOSEMU team and help 
> DOSEMU compete with DOSbox.
>
> https://launchpad.net/dosemu-reborn
Have you had a look into this already?
https://launchpad.net/debian/sid/+source/dosemu/

If you create a fork, you should probably package it
as dosemu-reborn-2.0.tar.gz and not dosemu-2.0.tar.gz
to not create an unnecessary confusion.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Bart Oldeman]

Hi,

I feel I should clear up the confusion a bit, as official DOSEMU maintainer.

Yes, it is true that life has changed quite a bit for me since 2007
and I am now chasing two small children after work which does not
leave as much energy or time to work on DOSEMU. There has however been
some activity, after 1.4.0 in SVN, the 1.4.0.1 patch release in 2008,
and quite a bit of development in git since Stas returned last year.
The distributions now release based on git that we tried to keep in a
stable state (the devel branch in git is allowed to change more).

So, if somebody skilled with more time than me puts in all the effort
to release a new version of DOSEMU I should welcome that.

However, this is not the case here:
1. "dosemu-reborn" is practically the same as dosemu 1.4.0 but with
licensing changes, some formatting changes and adds "#DOSEMU was
reborn by Devyn Collier Johnson" at various places. A "2.0" should be
instead (IMHO) based on git, be heavily tested, and come with a proper
list of user-visible changes (and not a deleted NEWS file).
2. The license was changed from GPLv2-only to GPLv3-only. Sorry, you
cannot do that in a fork. While I personally have no problem with
GPLv3, you would have to ask all copyright holders to make such a
change, or replace all code by those copyright holders (the dosemu
files that say "GPLv2 or later" are the exceptions). (Quite similarly
you cannot fork the Linux kernel under GPLv3 either).

So while I have no problems with people forking, in the way it is done
here I stronly object, and will only confuse people. But I will gladly
pass maintainership to somebody who can release a "DOSEMU 2.0" that
truly deserves that title.

Regards,
Bart Oldeman






On 9 July 2013 09:11, Devyn Collier Johnson <devyncjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> Aloha DOSEMU Users!
>
> I want to info everyone that DOSEMU has been released and is no longer
> abandonware. Feel free to contribute to the new DOSEMU team and help DOSEMU
> compete with DOSbox.
>
> https://launchpad.net/dosemu-reborn
>
> Mahalo,
>
> Devyn Collier Johnson
> DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Stas Sergeev]

10.07.2013 06:13, Bart Oldeman пишет:
> The distributions now release based on git that we tried to keep in a
> stable state (the devel branch in git is allowed to change more).
But not the case right now.
"master" appeared to have the nasty regressions (like the
insufficient HLT handlers and more), a nasty bugs (like broken
shift in wolf3d and some other games) and a license-incompatible
code like mame's opl3 ("devel" gets most of that covered already).
I mean, not good for even an unofficial release, but the guys
who do the unofficial releases, likely do not know about that.
If this can't be urgently resolved, dosemu is abandonware. :))

> A "2.0" should be
> instead (IMHO) based on git, be heavily tested, and come with a proper
> list of user-visible changes (and not a deleted NEWS file).
This was supposed to be true, but, for the reasons mentioned
above, I think this is not sufficient for a 2.0.
Do you have any plans to bring "master" in a state where at
least an unofficial (and eventually 2.0) releases are possible?
Otherwise debian or fedora guys will soon import it, if not yet.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Devyn Collier Johnson]

I will delete the project.

On 07/09/2013 10:13 PM, Bart Oldeman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I feel I should clear up the confusion a bit, as official DOSEMU maintainer.
>
> Yes, it is true that life has changed quite a bit for me since 2007
> and I am now chasing two small children after work which does not
> leave as much energy or time to work on DOSEMU. There has however been
> some activity, after 1.4.0 in SVN, the 1.4.0.1 patch release in 2008,
> and quite a bit of development in git since Stas returned last year.
> The distributions now release based on git that we tried to keep in a
> stable state (the devel branch in git is allowed to change more).
>
> So, if somebody skilled with more time than me puts in all the effort
> to release a new version of DOSEMU I should welcome that.
>
> However, this is not the case here:
> 1. "dosemu-reborn" is practically the same as dosemu 1.4.0 but with
> licensing changes, some formatting changes and adds "#DOSEMU was
> reborn by Devyn Collier Johnson" at various places. A "2.0" should be
> instead (IMHO) based on git, be heavily tested, and come with a proper
> list of user-visible changes (and not a deleted NEWS file).
> 2. The license was changed from GPLv2-only to GPLv3-only. Sorry, you
> cannot do that in a fork. While I personally have no problem with
> GPLv3, you would have to ask all copyright holders to make such a
> change, or replace all code by those copyright holders (the dosemu
> files that say "GPLv2 or later" are the exceptions). (Quite similarly
> you cannot fork the Linux kernel under GPLv3 either).
>
> So while I have no problems with people forking, in the way it is done
> here I stronly object, and will only confuse people. But I will gladly
> pass maintainership to somebody who can release a "DOSEMU 2.0" that
> truly deserves that title.
>
> Regards,
> Bart Oldeman
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9 July 2013 09:11, Devyn Collier Johnson <devyncjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Aloha DOSEMU Users!
>>
>> I want to info everyone that DOSEMU has been released and is no longer
>> abandonware. Feel free to contribute to the new DOSEMU team and help DOSEMU
>> compete with DOSbox.
>>
>> https://launchpad.net/dosemu-reborn
>>
>> Mahalo,
>>
>> Devyn Collier Johnson
>> DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released (DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com)

[Stas Sergeev]

10.07.2013 14:16, Devyn Collier Johnson пишет:
> I will delete the project.
You are always welcome to help bringing dosemu
out of the "abandonware" state by the different means
though. No one says that it is in a good shape right now
so there are many ways of doing that.
There are trackers and mail lists to discuss a new
things, post patches.
I guess the only thing people do not like to discuss is a
forks. :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: DOSEMU Version 2 has been Released

[Ivan Baldo]

El 10/07/13 07:30, Stas Sergeev escribió:
> 10.07.2013 14:16, Devyn Collier Johnson пишет:
>> I will delete the project.
> You are always welcome to help bringing dosemu
> out of the "abandonware" state by the different means
> though. No one says that it is in a good shape right now
> so there are many ways of doing that.
> There are trackers and mail lists to discuss a new
> things, post patches.
> I guess the only thing people do not like to discuss is a
> forks. :)
>
     That's right! Don't throw the towel Devyn! Bart and Stas are cool 
guys (together with many others in this mailing list) and they will help 
you out getting around knowing the code, guiding you to implement the 
improvements you may have in mind.
     You may just start by telling what would you think would be good to 
implement, etc.
     A new stable 1.4.x tarball would be a nice thing though, if 
somebody could help with that...
     Thanks for not forking it and I hope to see you around!!!
     Happy coding!


-- 
Ivan Baldo - ibaldo@adinet.com.uy - http://ibaldo.codigolibre.net/
 From Montevideo, Uruguay, at the south of South America.
Freelance programmer and GNU/Linux system administrator, hire me!
Alternatives: ibaldo@codigolibre.net - http://go.to/ibaldo

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Resurrect DOSEMU

[Devyn Collier Johnson]

DOSEMU Fans:

    I removed the package from the DOSEMU_Reborn project. I asked 
Launchpad how to delete the whole project, so that project will be 
closed sometime soon. I convinced the Wikipedia users to change the 
abandonware status to active, so the DOSEMU Wikipedia page now shows 
that DOSEMU is active.

    I would like to help DOSEMU in some way. I do not know C/C++/C# very 
well, so I cannot do too much programming. I was hoping to attract 
programmers to my project that could do some programming.

    I have some ideas that can help DOSEMU:
1. We should probably try to gather up some programmers to help.
2. I noticed that the SourceForge pages for DOSEMU are old. DOSEMU has 
not received any updates in years. Maybe if some of these areas got 
updates, that would help.
3. What is we spoke with the DOSbox developers about merging the two 
projects? Why have two DOS emulators for Linux? Why have to separate 
communities when we can have one large one? Open-source software is 
based off of collaboration, so we should merge the to groups and have 
collaboration. Competition will not help either of us; it seems to be 
killing DOSEMU. Plus, DOSEMU will not last long in my opinion. If we can 
convince the DOSbox developers to merge the projects then both emulators 
will do better and last longer. If this idea is successful, we should 
probably come up with a new name for the merged program/project. I would 
suggest PhoenixDOS - two projects disappear and one newer and better one 
forms.

Mahalo,

Devyn Collier Johnson
DevynCJohnson@Gmail.com

Re: Resurrect DOSEMU

[Paul Crawford]

Dear Devyn,
> 3. What is we spoke with the DOSbox developers about merging the two
> projects? Why have two DOS emulators for Linux? Why have to separate

I am not very sure about how DOSbox is implemented, but I think they 
have rather different approaches to the issue of running DOS 
applications under alternative operating systems. There is also the 
option of booting MS-DOS, etc, in a VMware virtual machine, etc, to add 
to the list of options for DOS software.

However, in our case the attraction of dosemu for Linux comes down to 
two points:

1) The option for direct hardware access, thus allowing old software to 
communicate with old hardware, but under the management of a secure 
networked system (e.g. access to NFS drives, remote log-in via SSH, time 
keeping accurate using NTP, etc).

2) Good emulation of file system access, so DOS applications can work 
with Linux file systems and see them in a reasonably sensible manner 
(e.g. all file names mapped to lower case on the Linux side, upper on 
DOS side, etc). VMware's shared folders do not work very well in this 
aspect (though using Samba you can get something reasonable, but then 
with Windows networking, so not really a DOS solution).

These are not generally requirements for running an old DOS game, but 
they are exceedingly useful for keeping tried & trusted hardware & 
software going where the alternative of a new system involving a 
complete re-write may be either impossible (no source code, etc) or 
simply impractical.

Regards,
Paul
-- 
Dr. Paul S. Crawford
Satellite Station
Dundee University
Small's Wynd, Dundee,
DD1 4HN, U.K.
Tel: +44 (0)1382 38 4687
Email: psc@sat.dundee.ac.uk
The University of Dundee is a Scottish Registered Charity, No. SC015096

Re: Resurrect DOSEMU

[Frederic Herman]

I am hoping that whatever is decided, that the result is an emulator 
that works properly in a 64 bit, particularly AMD, environment.  I have 
an old reliable accounting package which I rely on, that crashes with op 
code errors under the 64 bit environment.

I have given up sometime ago with running it under x86_64,and have 
resorted to using another machine with 32 bit hardware and OS just so I 
can run the accounting package via a remote ssh session.  I have been 
using Fedora Linus, but recently tried a Ubuntu linux (64 bit) and have 
the same problem.

I think I tried DOSbox, but I remember a show-stopper, maybe lack of 
printer support.

DOS emulation is not just for running games.  There are legacy business 
packages such as the one I use, that require a good emulator.  These 
packages were typically written in assembly language.  In my case, 
switching to a modern accounting package is not a just a matter of the 
cost of software.  The greater cost is the huge amount of time I would 
need to spend to manually convert about 10 business general ledgers to a 
new accounting package.

Fred

On 07/11/2013 07:56 AM, Paul Crawford wrote:
> Dear Devyn,
>> 3. What is we spoke with the DOSbox developers about merging the two
>> projects? Why have two DOS emulators for Linux? Why have to separate
>
> I am not very sure about how DOSbox is implemented, but I think they
> have rather different approaches to the issue of running DOS
> applications under alternative operating systems. There is also the
> option of booting MS-DOS, etc, in a VMware virtual machine, etc, to add
> to the list of options for DOS software.
>
> However, in our case the attraction of dosemu for Linux comes down to
> two points:
>
> 1) The option for direct hardware access, thus allowing old software to
> communicate with old hardware, but under the management of a secure
> networked system (e.g. access to NFS drives, remote log-in via SSH, time
> keeping accurate using NTP, etc).
>
> 2) Good emulation of file system access, so DOS applications can work
> with Linux file systems and see them in a reasonably sensible manner
> (e.g. all file names mapped to lower case on the Linux side, upper on
> DOS side, etc). VMware's shared folders do not work very well in this
> aspect (though using Samba you can get something reasonable, but then
> with Windows networking, so not really a DOS solution).
>
> These are not generally requirements for running an old DOS game, but
> they are exceedingly useful for keeping tried & trusted hardware &
> software going where the alternative of a new system involving a
> complete re-write may be either impossible (no source code, etc) or
> simply impractical.
>
> Regards,
> Paul

Re: Resurrect DOSEMU

[Mateusz Viste]

On 07/11/2013 03:44 PM, Devyn Collier Johnson wrote:
>     I removed the package from the DOSEMU_Reborn project.

That's cool - it will avoid any further confusion among the (already 
sparse) user base.

> I convinced the Wikipedia users to change the
> abandonware status to active, so the DOSEMU Wikipedia page now shows
> that DOSEMU is active.

That's cool too! :)

>     I would like to help DOSEMU in some way. I do not know C/C++/C# very
> well, so I cannot do too much programming.

You could test - see the DOSemu bug tracker. It's a tool to report bugs, 
propose features.. Feedback is important for development, and testing is 
the best way to provide feedback.

>     I have some ideas that can help DOSEMU:
> 1. We should probably try to gather up some programmers to help.

good luck with that :)
I don't think programmers can be 'attracted' like, say, bees. 
programmers are vicious animals that usually like to do whatever they 
like most - if it's coding DOS emulation layers, then I believe they 
will find DOSEMU by themselves.

> 3. What is we spoke with the DOSbox developers about merging the two
> projects? Why have two DOS emulators for Linux?

This is probably not such a good idea like it could sound like. DOSBox 
and DOSEMU are quite different. DOSBox is targeted to be multiplatform, 
while DOSEmu is specific to Linux (and that's one of the reason it's SO 
much faster than dosbox). There are probably some areas where both could 
meet (like sound emulation, vga stuff maybe?) but the cores are quite 
different, so I don't think a merge is possible.

Mateusz

Re: Resurrect DOSEMU

[Stas Sergeev]

11.07.2013 17:58, Mateusz Viste пишет:
>> I convinced the Wikipedia users to change the
>> abandonware status to active, so the DOSEMU Wikipedia page now shows
>> that DOSEMU is active.
> That's cool too! :)
IMHO wiki was fine, and whoever did the release (if ever),
could update it with all the necessary info.
Doesn't matter now though.

>>     I have some ideas that can help DOSEMU:
>> 1. We should probably try to gather up some programmers to help.
> good luck with that :)
> I don't think programmers can be 'attracted' like, say, bees.
You can - with money for instance, but there are the other
ways too.
There is probably no good howto about contributing ideas,
wishes and the management, but it is all possible, and not only
with the money.

In any case, I wonder if this guy is even subscribed to this list.
See here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:DOSEMU&action=edit&section=5
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html