MSX-DOS 1/2 versions

Pagina 2/3
1 | | 3

Van Manuel

Ascended (18092)

afbeelding van Manuel

29-09-2013, 14:37

Good idea to use that one. It contains command.com 1.11, to be exact.

2432 apr 30  1986 msxdos.sys  MD5: dadede17aaeb6852d83a33030027edb1
6656 apr 30  1986 command.com MD5: 08f84127e5baf86f659cf43adf4de246

So, the same MSX-DOS.SYS as RetroTechie has. Apparently a different command.com

Van mars2000you

Enlighted (5965)

afbeelding van mars2000you

29-09-2013, 14:58

Personnally, I always use

MSXDOS.SYS dadede17aaeb6852d83a33030027edb1

with

COMMAND.COM 26d1c7a061a654e1ad853855310ad830

(version 2.2 by Tim Paterson 03/06/86)

Van AlesteDX

Expert (76)

afbeelding van AlesteDX

29-09-2013, 15:03

2.2 from Tim paterson? Is the same guy who created MS-DOS 1?

Regards.

Van Manuel

Ascended (18092)

afbeelding van Manuel

29-09-2013, 15:08

mars: that Tim Paterson string is also in most other command.com versions. It's not really the version of command.com itself as displayed on the screen. At the start of the file the on-screen displayed version is readable.

Van mars2000you

Enlighted (5965)

afbeelding van mars2000you

29-09-2013, 15:11

I think it's the same guy as MSX-DOS1 is very close to MS-DOS1 (and MSX-DOS2 very close to MS-DOS 6).

His name appears in many MSX-DOS versions (check the end of the file with an hexa editor).

Van mars2000you

Enlighted (5965)

afbeelding van mars2000you

29-09-2013, 15:21

Manuel wrote:

mars: that Tim Paterson string is also in most other command.com versions. It's not really the version of command.com itself as displayed on the screen. At the start of the file the on-screen displayed version is readable.

In the version that I use, the screen displays

COMMAND.COM version 2.2

Van Manuel

Ascended (18092)

afbeelding van Manuel

29-09-2013, 15:48

That's weird! Are you sure that was not command2.com? It should definitely be a 1.x type of version.

Can you explain why MSX-DOS2 is very close to MS-DOS 6?

Van mars2000you

Enlighted (5965)

afbeelding van mars2000you

29-09-2013, 15:52

Manuel wrote:

That's weird! Are you sure that was not command2.com? It should definitely be a 1.x type of version.

Can you explain why MSX-DOS2 is very close to MS-DOS 6?

It's definitely command.com, not command2.com

For the rest, you can find the answer by yourself.

Van Manuel

Ascended (18092)

afbeelding van Manuel

29-09-2013, 16:39

So, your command.com says both:
COMMAND version 2.2
and
MSX-DOS version 2.2 by Tim Paterson 03/06/84
?

I couldn't find an answer about why MSX-DOS2 would be specifically like version 6 of MS-DOS.

Van Briqunullus

Champion (393)

afbeelding van Briqunullus

09-09-2020, 10:24

Sorry for bumping an old thread, but people use the forum for reference as well. This thread lists two different versions of command.com 1.11. In another forum topic about early MSX-DOS versions, I have shown they are indeed different and one of them contains a bug.

I have examined the MSX-DOS versions on this site. It is extremely ease to change just a version number in msxdos.sys or command.com using a hex editor and it shows. However, I could not trace all of the MSX-DOS versions.

  • All the msxdos.sys versions 1.03, 1.8, 2.11 and DDX-DOS and DISPRO-DOS are identical. Only DDX-DOS and DISPRO-DOS have been translated to Portuguese, but the are identical to each other.
  • In MSX-DOS 1.03-1.11 the command.com is the Tim Paterson version. DDX-DOS and DISPRO-DOS are again identical, but translated to Portuguese.
  • In MSX-DOS 2.11-1.11 the command.com is the Hal-F version. Command 1.12 is 23 bytes different, did someone just made a small patch? Command 1.15 is an extended version that adds support for ECHO, CLS and VER. It has been made by someone called FD_Soft.
  • Command 1.21 is from Nike-DOS. In my personal collection I have Nike-DOS 3.42 with command 1.21.
  • I have seen command 1.40 in the past as 1.20 and 4.00. It's originally Spanish, made by Gustavo and this version is from December 4, 1989. I have an accompanying msxdos.sys for it as well that supports config.sys. It has been used by the Dutch hcc group on their public domain disks (that's how I got it), probably to avoid copyright issues distributing the official MSX-DOS.
  • HB-DOS and MF-DOS both seem to be unrelated to other DOS versions and to each other. MF-DOS supports subdirectories.
  • SOLX-DOS, ALIEN-DOS and DOSMASTER are all single file DOS versions and related to each other. I don't know which of these was first.

If anyone has more information about the unofficial MSX-DOS versions I'd like to know. Also if you want other MSX-DOS versions (official or unofficial) to be examined, please share them with me.

AlesteDX wrote:

There is a version I got several years ago (on a original floppy of course) with a Canon external floppy drive. That version is msxdos.sys 1.02 and command.com 1.10. This version is the older I'm aware of.

I'm very interested in this version. Anyone still have this?

Pagina 2/3
1 | | 3