On Sunday, February 13, 2005 at 2:16:46 PM UTC-7, Daniel Hamilton wrote:

> All this "MS-DOS 7.1" is, is a copy of the DOS supplied with either
> Windows 95 OSR2, Windows 98, or Windows 98 Second Edition. This person
> took the COMMAND.COM and butchered it with a hex editor to make it say
> MS-DOS 7.1.

I just want to say that "MS-DOS 7.1", regardless of how it was created, is actually a great version of DOS to use if you're making a DOS system for any reason. Among other things, it features tab completion which is very useful.

Following richud's instructions (https://www.richud.com/wiki/Ubuntu_Create_Floppy_Image) I was able to edit the DOS 7.1 disk01.img and remove SETUP.BAT and references to it in AUTOEXEC.BAT which makes it very useful for creating utility disks (for example for BIOS updates on old systems).

On 12/24/21 3:40 PM, Felicia wrote:
> I just want to say that "MS-DOS 7.1", regardless of how it was created,
> is actually a great version of DOS to use if you're making a DOS system
> for any reason. Among other things, it features tab completion which
> is very useful.

I've found that MS-DOS 7.1 (from Windows 95 / 98) to be problematic for
some things that I want to do. As such I've tended to revert to MS-DOS
6.22 or other DOS. This usually presents itself with non-Microsoft
products, particularly network related, e.g. Novell NetWare (server).

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

PC-DOS 7.1?

On 12/24/2021 17:45, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 12/24/21 3:40 PM, Felicia wrote:
>> I just want to say that "MS-DOS 7.1", regardless of how it was
>> created, is actually a great version of DOS to use if you're making a
>> DOS system for any reason.  Among other things, it features tab
>> completion which is very useful.
>
> I've found that MS-DOS 7.1 (from Windows 95 / 98) to be problematic for
> some things that I want to do.  As such I've tended to revert to MS-DOS
> 6.22 or other DOS.  This usually presents itself with non-Microsoft
> products, particularly network related, e.g. Novell NetWare (server).
>
>
>

On 12/24/21 5:36 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
> PC-DOS 7.1?

I didn't try IBM's PC-DOS 7.1. I should.

As I type this reply I'm struggling to remember where PC-DOS 2000 lands
in the PC-DOS version numbers. I'm focusing on PC-DOS 2000 because I
believe I have a physical copy of it somewhere in my collection.

I've usually ended up using MS-DOS 6.22 or Novell DOS that comes with
the NetWare, depending on version. NetWare 5.x tends to come with
Novell DOS.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

PC DOS 7.1 was never released as such, but it was part of a toolkit to
install some sort of networking?

There was a way to extract the good stuff, but that's above my pay
grade. At one time, Tim Clarke was looking into it.

On 12/24/2021 18:42, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 12/24/21 5:36 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
>> PC-DOS 7.1?
>
> I didn't try IBM's PC-DOS 7.1.  I should.
>
> As I type this reply I'm struggling to remember where PC-DOS 2000 lands
> in the PC-DOS version numbers.  I'm focusing on PC-DOS 2000 because I
> believe I have a physical copy of it somewhere in my collection.
>
> I've usually ended up using MS-DOS 6.22 or Novell DOS that comes with
> the NetWare, depending on version.  NetWare 5.x tends to come with
> Novell DOS.
>
>
>

PC DOS 2000 was superseded by PC DOS 7.1

On 12/24/2021 19:16, Louis Ohland wrote:
> PC DOS 7.1 was never released as such, but it was part of a toolkit to
> install some sort of networking?
>
> There was a way to extract the good stuff, but that's above my pay
> grade. At one time, Tim Clarke was looking into it.
>
> On 12/24/2021 18:42, Grant Taylor wrote:
>> On 12/24/21 5:36 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
>>> PC-DOS 7.1?
>>
>> I didn't try IBM's PC-DOS 7.1.  I should.
>>
>> As I type this reply I'm struggling to remember where PC-DOS 2000
>> lands in the PC-DOS version numbers.  I'm focusing on PC-DOS 2000
>> because I believe I have a physical copy of it somewhere in my
>> collection.
>>
>> I've usually ended up using MS-DOS 6.22 or Novell DOS that comes with
>> the NetWare, depending on version.  NetWare 5.x tends to come with
>> Novell DOS.
>>
>>
>>
>

On 12/24/21 6:16 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
> PC DOS 7.1 was never released as such, but it was part of a toolkit to
> install some sort of networking?

Odd.

Maybe I'm thinking of retail boxes of PC-DOS 7.0.

> There was a way to extract the good stuff, but that's above my pay
> grade. At one time, Tim Clarke was looking into it.

You should be able to copy IBMBIO.SYS, IBMDOS.SYS, and COMMAND.COM off
of any bootable disk. -- I think that's the file names, if I'm
remembering correctly.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

On 12/24/21 6:17 PM, Louis Ohland wrote:
> PC DOS 2000 was superseded by PC DOS 7.1

Ya. I thought something like that had happened.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

On 12/24/21 6:51 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
> Ya.  I thought something like that had happened.

I see boxed copies of PC-DOS 7(.0) on eBay.

However, 7.0 != 7.1.

I can see how IBM might have updated 7.0 to 7.1 for use in things.
There might even be a patch for 7.0 to bring it up to 7.1 if you know
where to look.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

Never seen a patch.

On 12/24/2021 20:24, Grant Taylor wrote:
> There might even be a patch for 7.0 to bring it up to 7.1 if you know
> where to look.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_DOS#PC_DOS_7.1

"PC DOS 7

PC DOS 7 was released in April 1995 and was the last release of DOS
before IBM software development (other than the development IBM
ViaVoice) moved to Austin. The REXX programming language was added, as
well as support for a new floppy disk format, XDF, which extended a
standard 1.44 MB floppy disk to 1.86 MB. SuperStor disk compression
technology was replaced with Stac Electronics' STACKER. An algebraic
command line calculator and a utility program to load device drivers
from the command line were added. PC DOS 7 also included many
optimizations to increase performance and reduce memory usage.[16]

PC DOS 2000

The most recent retail release was PC DOS 2000 – released from Austin in
1998 – which found its niche in the embedded software market and
elsewhere. PC DOS 2000 is a slipstream of 7.0 with Y2K and other fixes
applied. To applications, PC DOS 2000 reports itself as "IBM PC DOS
7.00, revision 1", in contrast to the original PC DOS 7, which reported
itself as "IBM PC DOS 7.00, revision 0".[nb 1]

Hitachi used PC DOS 2000 in their legacy Drive Fitness Test (4.15) and
Hitachi Feature Tool (2.15) until 2009.[17] ThinkPad products had a copy
of the latest version of PC DOS in their Rescue and Recovery partition.[18]

PC DOS 7.1

PC DOS 7.1 added support for Logical Block Addressing (LBA) and FAT32
partitions.[nb 1] Various builds from 1999 up to 2003 were not released
in retail, but used in products such as the IBM ServerGuide Scripting
Toolkit.[19] A build of this version of DOS appeared in Norton Ghost
from Symantec.[20] Version 7.1 indicates support for FAT32 also in
MS-DOS.[16]

Most builds of this version of DOS are limited to the kernel files
IBMBIO.COM, IBMDOS.COM, and COMMAND.COM. The updated programs FDISK32
and FORMAT32 allow one to prepare FAT32 disks. Additional utilities are
taken from PC DOS 2000, where needed. "

On 12/25/2021 08:48, Louis Ohland wrote:
> Never seen a patch.
>
> On 12/24/2021 20:24, Grant Taylor wrote:
>> There might even be a patch for 7.0 to bring it up to 7.1 if you know
>> where to look.
>

https://liam-on-linux.livejournal.com/59703.html

http://toogam.com/software/archive/opsys/dos/ibmpcdos/getpcd71.htm

Uh, there is no pre-packaged floppy images.

At one time I pulled the SGTK down, might have it yet.

On 25-12-2021 15:58, Louis Ohland wrote:
> http://toogam.com/software/archive/opsys/dos/ibmpcdos/getpcd71.htm
>
> Uh, there is no pre-packaged floppy images.
>
> At one time I pulled the SGTK down, might have it yet.

It's all here:
https://tinyurl.com/y4b8khwu

Merry Christmas!

--
Jelte,
Admirer of the letter of IBM with blue Ishiki