Well, this looks real to me, so heres the story behind it (and no, as yet it's not uploaded anywhere). A few weeks ago, I purchased a box of computer hardware at a garage sale, which inlcuded a number of hard drives (rather small, at that... the largest is 1.2GB). One of the drives contains a number of programming environments, a copy of the windows 3.11 installer and setup files, and what appears to be the source code for DOS 6. The total size of the source is about 70 megs. After talking to a few people about it, I have concluded that if such source has previously been publicly available, it's not well known in the community, which is the reason for this post.
Would anyone like to do something with this
I would like to have a look at it...
Oh well... and here I thought I found something cool.... :S
Correction: you *did* find something cool. Just not unheard of. :wink:
I still find it interesting. Which programming environments are there? Have you examined the sources? Can you build the executables easily? Maybe your files and the ones posted in this thread differ in some bits. Maybe you have important and interesting documentation.
I still offer my webspace to host it, but it would be neat to offer different downloads, if possible, like having the programs and utilities separated and stuff. How feasible is this?
Well, I think I need Nasm (at least, it keeps asking for Nasm). Nasm is in there, several copies of it, in fact. So far, I keep getting other command not founds when I try to build stuff... it looks like all the commands are in there somewhere, however my DOS path is now enourmous and I'm still adding to it... i think an installer for NASM would fix this.
As for seperating things, I think it should be feasible... you can build QB seperatly, for example. I don't know much about building asm, but there is a seperate makefile in each of the folders for the utilities.
Yes, there is some difference between my version and the other, but I am not sure what the significance of that difference is. My version apparently has fewer files, which could mean.... I have no idea. Mine could be missing something, or the other may have had something added which was not origional content, or they might be different versions... and I don't have time for the in depth comparision to find out what, if anything, is different right now.
What I have looked at has been extraordinarily well documented
Hmm, I haven't looked through my copy very well. Anyone know where I can find the source code to the almighty Debug.com?
How long did you look for, 2 seconds?
It's in cmd\debug\
Actually, just found it before you posted.
I look slowly. :wink:
Eh. I can't understand half of it. What JS pointed out on MSN, however, which is neat, is a utility somewhere in the package
written in BASIC.