re: Re: Beta vs. Stable

Hi, I disagree...
MEM works just fine. We should not aim to be command-switch compatible to
everything, as long as we offer the same features. The only exception are
commands that get used in batch files (okay, you can run MEM in a batch
file, but I meant "commonly used"). A user will be happy with the features
of MEM and recognize that MEM can do what MS MEM can do.
Speaking of BATCHES, I think having a command-switch compatible JOIN and
SUBST would be more interesting. SWSUBST is just too powerful and too
complicated for me :-).

The secondary BUFFERS value should be parsed and ignored, as FCBS is.
I am not sure about INSTALL and DRIVEPARM. I think the latter should be
doable... And yes, COUNTRY would be quite useful.

What other well-known compatibility exceptions apart from Windows do we
have? Would be quite interesting to know.

I do not get your "must compile with MASM" point at all. MASM is not part
of MS DOS, it is just another MS product. As MS DOS never came with sources,
nobody will try to compile it with MS compliers. Nor will anybody with
FreeDOS.

What kernel interrupts are still missing for MS DOS 5.0 compatibility?
What are the kernel interrupts that we "should not implement"?
What MS DOS version belong the kernel interrupts that FreeDOS is still
missing to?

Eric