18 Nov
2006
18 Nov
'06
8:09 p.m.
Do they really allow a pseudo-compatible to utilize
vanilla DOS telecom programs?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
18 Nov
18 Nov
8:32 p.m.
You wrote...
Do they really allow a pseudo-compatible to utilize
vanilla DOS telecom programs?
Eh, not sure that's quite the right way to look at it, but in the final
analysis, yes.
In the early days of PC's, the bios services to talk to the communications
port were painful and unreliable, especially at then higher speeds. Not
always standard either, so comms/bbs programs could have trouble running on
a given platform at all, or even if so - not well.
So the "Fossil" driver was created. It was a serial port driver that spoke
directly to the underlying hardware (8250 registers) on one side, and
presented an efficient standard API to the other side. So it was really
created for performance reasons, but it had an additional effect of allowing
coms programs to run on hardware that the fossil driver supported and the
coms program didn't (as long as the coms program supported the fossil API).
Jay West
9:18 p.m.
On 18 Nov 2006 at 19:32, Jay West wrote:
Eh, not sure that's quite the right way to look at
it, but in the final
analysis, yes.
I'd like to think that FOSSIL drivers have their roots in the old not-
very-compatible 8-bit Z80/808x world. Comms implementations were
about as widely varied as you could get and, stricly speaking, the
CP/M CBIOS didn't demand a comm port implementation (although some
vendors included the comm function under PTP/PTR).
So communications programs such as DSZ and Kermit used customizable
overlays. Since DLL's didn't exist back then, you filled out your
overlay, then combined with the generic part of the program and wrote
a customized executable out.
Cheers,
Chuck
11:53 p.m.
On 18 Nov 2006 at 21:40, Jay West wrote:
I am not positive, but I don't think Z80's
were generally around when Fossil
was created by the Fidonet crowd.
I don't think FOSSIL was ever implemented on a Z80 machine, but when
Fidonet got started back in 1984, Z80's were certainly around.
I was thinking not only of the model-specific patches to DSZ, but the
old Irv Hoff BYE comm program for CP/M. I think one of the old CP/M
BBS programs (QBBS and RBBS maybe?) needed BYE to work. i.e., FOSSIL
wasn't all that revolutionary.
Cheers,
Chuck
8:36 p.m.
Chris M wrote:
Do they really allow a pseudo-compatible to utilize
vanilla DOS telecom programs?
I used to use a fossil driver back in the old BBS days, because the
normal DOS serial port driver was a bit "unsuitable". It had lots of
braindead stuff like it would block waiting for a character to arrive,
while the fossil driver wouldn't.
Gordon.
10:44 p.m.
FOSSIL = Fido Opus Standardized Serial interface Layer
I ran OPUS on a dec rainbow, the only thing you needed to do to run Fido or
OPUS, or binkleyterm or any other FOSSIL compatible comm./bbs program was
the appropriate FOSSIL layer for your hardware.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Chris M
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 5:10 PM
To: talk
Subject: has anyone ever utilized a fossil driver?
Do they really allow a pseudo-compatible to utilize
vanilla DOS telecom programs?
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
6461
days inactive
6461
days old
6 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
cclist＠sydex.com -
chrism3667＠yahoo.com -
geoffr＠zipcon.net -
gordon＠gjcp.net -
jwest＠classiccmp.org