Its annoying that this thread is being used to announce DOSBox fork releases. Is the thought process that the dev of a DOSBox frontend isn't aware of new versions?
DOSBox-X 2026.05.02 is out and this time they've added a new option that could be aded to DBGL:
When DOS games use the Adlib FM chip to do "digitized speech", DOSBox-X does emulate that correctly, and it also correctly emula […]
When DOS games use the Adlib FM chip to do "digitized speech", DOSBox-X
does emulate that correctly, and it also correctly emulates how low
the volume is on the sound card output. However to make it more
audible, a new option "adlib pcm boost" has been added. If set,
and the Adlib emulation detects that the guest application is
playing PCM audio through it, the audio levels of the FM output
will be amplified to make the digitized speech much more audible.
(joncampbell123)
DosFreak wrote on 2026-03-30, 16:18:Its annoying that this thread is being used to announce DOSBox fork releases. Is the thought process that the dev of a DOSBox frontend isn't aware of new versions?
Apparently so, since it seems its still going on..
If you want me to drop it, just say it so.
I feel compelled to mention it here when some compatible DOSBox fork adds new options that might (or not) be interesting for DBGL users, that's all.
I don't know if rcblanke is aware of these things or if he's just to busy with real life.
If you would ask him it would be appreciated.
IMO, if it's such a chore to know what options are added to each fork then each fork should make it easier to know what was added instead of having to dig for it both for regular users and frontend developers.
Then the threads could be linked in the OP and people when they want to know why an option isn't in DBGL they can ask for why it isn't.
I'm not sure I see a point in constantly bringing up options that might need to be added to DBGL that a user may or may not ever use. You may use them all, I can't say.
My main issue is that this forum is for the original DOSBox. Fork discussion should be in their respective threads (for those that have their own thread).
This thread is for DBGL, not forks.
At least in my DBGL version (v0.100beta17), the most recent DOSBox-X release I can configure is 2025.02.01, so it seems there's not much point bothering with newer releases until DBGL fully supports them.
dosdog wrote on 2026-05-04, 10:39:At least in my DBGL version (v0.100beta17), the most recent DOSBox-X release I can configure is 2025.02.01, so it seems there's not much point bothering with newer releases until DBGL fully supports them.
You can manually edit your DOSBox-X conf files and add any new options you want (or turn them on using the DOSBox-X menus) and they work just fine. DBGL is just giving us an 'easy way' to turn all those on or off. DBGL just passes the parameters available to your conf file as it is. If it's not there in the GUI, you can still use it. Depending on what you use DOSBox for, most of those new options might not even matter as it is.
Monotremata wrote on 2026-05-05, 01:46:You can manually edit your DOSBox-X conf files and add any new options you want (or turn them on using the DOSBox-X menus) and they work just fine. DBGL is just giving us an 'easy way' to turn all those on or off. DBGL just passes the parameters available to your conf file as it is. If it's not there in the GUI, you can still use it. Depending on what you use DOSBox for, most of those new options might not even matter as it is.
I am aware of this, thanks though.
Hi everybody,
First of all, apologies for the silence on my part, these last months.
Due to multiple reasons, the energy I used to get from working on DBGL has dimished somewhat. After nearly 20 years of DBGL, I need a break. And while I still very much enjoy the nostalgia of retrogaming, my interest has shifted a bit away from DOSBox, in the directing of console and arcade gaming (using MiSTerFPGA, for example).
Truth be told, I'm not sure what the future looks like for DBGL at this moment. Maybe I'll be happy coding on it in a few weeks time, maybe no more. For me personally, DBGL functions as I had originally intended it to, and so much more. I had an absolute blast developing and adding features with help from the awesome Vogons community, and learned so much in the progress. Seriously, you guys and gals are great!
FWIW In case DBGL progress stagnates, it goes without saying that any developer may feely take the existing DBGL sourcecode and create a fork. I'm very much willing to assist with any technical questions.
Regards,
Ronald
