ruthan wrote on 2024-11-30, 01:13:

It looks like that could have 2 Panel FTP client see screenshot, description is sayin that is for Win95, so its confusing.

If that feature only works under Windows 9x, then it's pointless - there's plenty of native Win32 software for that.

Norton COmmander 5.51 has some Network tools, i cant make it start.. It needs to prepare some network configuration before it, i dunno which networking stack its expecting.

Novell Netware.

I also soo there is new version of mTCP, it has at least some command line FTP, i still looking forward GUI client but its better than nothing..

It also has NetDrive, which allows to access remote files using any file manager.

There are also other programs like that, eg. Samba + Microsoft Network Client version 3.0 for MS-DOS.
Really, no need to focus on the FTP protocol.

Grzyb wrote on 2024-11-30, 10:44:

There are also other programs like that, eg. Samba + Microsoft Network Client version 3.0 for MS-DOS.
Really, no need to focus on the FTP protocol.

I urge you to take a look at my DDLINK transfer program.

I seem to keep posting this information in various forums... Moving stuff
around between DOS system is something a surprising number people still want
to do - So I've made up this "information" sheet about DDLINK.

It performs file transfers (simple and muli-file/directory etc.) with a decent
split-screen user interface allowing you to see both systems at once.

It can transfer over:
- Network (needs a packet driver)
- Serial (needs a null-modem cable *)
- Parallel (needs a special two-way data transfer cable *)
- Two locations on same system (nothing extra required)
* Wiring is included in internal Help, and I include a couple programs to
help test new cables as you build them.

Other useful file related functions, which can be performed either end:
- View files (text or HEX)
- Change file attributes and timestamp

It runs under DOS and needs only a 8088 (or better).
edit: (forgot to mention) - It runs well under DosBox (with virtual NE2000) which provides an easy
way to transfer between DOS and more modern systems)

It's a single small (17k .COM) and needs no other support files
(Other than packet driver for network transfers)

It does NOT have to be installed - just run DDLINK.COM (easy to copy around)

It can "bootstrap" itself to a new system over a serial connection,
without any other software required on the remote end.

It has two "modes" and runs as two end programs, a "client" and "server".
Start the server end first, and a client will automatically find it.

All user interaction is done from the client.

It uses it's own protocol to transfer (basically the same messages over
network, serial or parallel) - this protocol is documented in detail within the
DDLINK documentation, and I provide source code to a simple program which
implements it.

Over a network the protocol is contained within "raw" packets, is not based
on IP or any other common network protocol. It therefore cannot be routed and
works on the local network only).
- A major plus is that it required no setup, address assignment etc.

DDLINK is free, and can be obtained from:
dunfield.themindfactory.com -> Download files -> DDLINK

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

If that feature only works under Windows 9x, then it's pointless - there's plenty of native Win32 software for that.

Well its some 3rd party information, it seems that it could work in Dos too, its not disabled when pure Dos is detected.. Its wrong of shot.
On Windows 95+ we have Winscp, its much more reable that Windows sharing, which is quite hard to debug, i usually enable all backwards compatibility things, but its on some machines refuse to work, or work only sometimes,
even o new machine. Windows 10 have now used OpenSSH server as optimal feature.. it needs some GUI frontend, instead of text config and manualy restarting services, but once of dig into it, you can setup it in few hours, include old autentification algorims for WinSCP versions. Version 4.19 /4.40 Works on Win9x+ and NT, with unofficial new .Net 2.0-3.5 for Win9x it maybe could be even higher versions, i not tested it yet.

I urge you to take a look at my DDLINK transfer program.

It looks like some what we dream of for long time, its almost impossible to keep the track about all project, especially is you have other hobbies.
I will check of course, but its good to keep all alternative.

Norton COmmander 5.51 has some Network tools, i cant make it start.. It needs to prepare some network configuration before it, i dunno which networking stack its expecting.

=> Novell Netware.

Well i never used Novel more link user in some school / work or some edication course, like 25 years ago.
First of all it was paid, i dunno where is officialy free old version for retro gaming. I heard that its main advantages was smaller memory footprint. It also was specialized utility / business vs. part of Windows, which MS have to provide for free. Sort of new Windpws 3D Modeling program situation vs. Max / Maya.
I dont even know if Novell could wrong on client to client bases or you do need some server, also im not sure about availability novel drivers for Dos, if they exists virtually for every NIC or support is limited..
Update: Quick check by old text, Novell client should have just 4KB footprint, i dunno if it need packet drivers too, i dont remember if they could be upper memory.. if not memory footprint for all networking stack would be higger.
There also questins if Novell does not have some compatibility problems with some games, especially very old ones, in Dos it would not be something suprising.

Long time ago, i did really low level analysis DOS / early Windows networking:
Dos / Dosbox / Dos VMs ethernet / filesharing /network Dos to Win98-Win10 -WIP, help needed especially from Win admins..
Some people has good memory, i dont. There was quite a lot open points, without right answers..

i added it as optimal part of my ultimate dos Configs here:
X58/i865/V880 - Yamaha7x4/AurealV1/2 pure Dos7.1- compatibility list/research/ultim. drivers configs, WIP- gurus needed
. Main problem is that networking too big memory footprint to keep it enabled by default..

I remember that summary, but now six years later there are things that need to be updated.

• mTCP now has proper hostname support. You don't need to memorize IP addresses.
• mTCP now has a "network attached storage" device driver.
• I don't think that summary ever mentioned EtherDFS.

ruthan wrote on 2024-11-30, 18:36:

Long time ago, i did really low level analysis DOS / early Windows networking:
Dos / Dosbox / Dos VMs ethernet / filesharing /network Dos to Win98-Win10 -WIP, help needed especially from Win admins..

Lots of information there.. thanks!

I don't think it mentions NEOS.NET - http://ftp.carnet.hr/pub/pub/pc/networking/NeOS/

This is a fairly decent little DOS peer-to-peer networking package that I used a LOT back in the day.

I actually used it enough to write my own setup program for it .. made it easier (at least for me)
to get it working on a new system. That and the original NEOS release I used (which appears to be
the same one currently offered) is available on my site.

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

DaveDDS wrote on 2024-11-30, 17:34:

I urge you to take a look at my DDLINK transfer program.

Thanks, but I hardly ever have more than one DOS machine running, so I don't really need a DOS<->DOS transfer program...

Yes, I see that:

It runs well under DosBox (with virtual NE2000) which provides an easy
way to transfer between DOS and more modern systems)

...but it seems unnecessarily complicated.

As of yet, I'm happy enough with Samba + Microsoft Network Client.
Yes, it does get more and more difficult - Re: Windows for Workgroups TCP/IP Disk - so it's nice to know about other possible solutions...

Grzyb wrote on 2024-11-30, 21:55:

...but it seems unnecessarily complicated.

As of yet, I'm happy enough with Samba + Microsoft Network Client.
Yes, it does get more and more difficult - Re: Windows for Workgroups TCP/IP Disk - so it's nice to know about other possible solutions...

If you have something that works, perfect .. and I agree that if you don't normally use DosBox
it's a lot of "stuff" to put on your modern desktop ... but I've written a LOT of code over the years
within DOS... so I use DosBox a LOT ...

I still use "MegaBuild 6" - which most consider obsolete these days, but it has worked very well for me, does
what I want, is simpler than "newer" ones, and none of the bugs I've noticed have been fixed in them..

The reason I started with MegaBuild 6 is that it supports a virtual NE2000 network card, which the Crynwr NE2000
packet driver recognizes and works with! - so pretty much ALL of the various networking tools I wrote in DOS
will work. Needless to say, I set that up within DosBox very early-on.
(I've tried newer DosBoxs and they work well too)

I still have (at least) 5 DOS systems, and I use DDLINK all the time to move things between them:

System1> DDLINK p= /S
- Starts a DDLINK server (with the first packet interface found)

System2> DDLINK p=
- Starts a DDLINK client (with the first packet interface found)

There's no other setup at all - I can just copy DDLINK.COM to a "new" system and use it exactly the same way!

There's a simple on-screen interface (client end) which lets you browse on both systems and copy back and
forth.

And under DosBox, it works exactly the same way.

The only "problem" with DosBox is that DosBox has to have directories on the host "mounted" as drives
in order to access them ... easy to do before you run DDLINK

For me:
- Almost all files I want to move to/from DOS systems are already in the DosBox environment.
- I happen to have a large (1G )RamDisk on my system which is where various temp files go as I work
on things... and I have R: mounted within DosBox -- so (for me) it's trivial to move stuff to/from the
R: drive where DosBox/DDLINK can access it!

You can see more by searching DDLINK on Vogons ... I had a thread going about it a while back, posted
some screeen shots etc.

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

I missed 2 last post on 1st page, when i wrote my last reply..

mbbrutman wrote on 2024-11-30, 19:07:

I remember that summary, but now six years later there are things that need to be updated.

Yeah, i was actualy looking for mTCP updates, but failed to find some all updates in one place changelog. In my configs is you 2015 package, its 9 years, i wrote it in 2018 so "only " 6 years, there so not actually some big hot disscussion about it in whole that time.
I at least made Dosbox networking meanwhile working again, i had to install again WinPCAP and remember that Dosbox needs long NICs names from Windows Control panel network adapters list. I revived bridge to make DosQemu networking working, it needs TAP driver for change.

Nas driver, what protocol its using WIndows share or Linux Samba sharing, another some new NAS special protocol, introduced by main producers of Nas boxes?
EtherDFS - i never heard about it, my memory blocks are empty.

mbbrutman wrote on 2024-11-30, 02:02:

Hi, your post is unclear in places. Are you able to make the command line FTP client or the FTP server work on your system? If those don't work then a GUI isn't going to help anything.

In half, im usable to connect to some testing server on internet and trasfer files by commands, but not my server, what was sort of expected.
I have found some SSH - : https://sshdos.sourceforge.net/ with whole telnet / sftp / scp package, it seems to used WATCOM networking stack. SO someone probably already made that "backend part" work of my dreamed project, i need to test it more..

DaveDDS wrote on 2024-11-30, 21:08:

I don't think it mentions NEOS.NET - http://ftp.carnet.hr/pub/pub/pc/networking/NeOS/

I read quite a lot guides and articles and tested a lot of stuff, never came in contact with this at least not something heavily recommended and used. You have to cut corners \ scope somewhere.
Now its recommended, so if there would be some new round of testing it with be included, so i added to description - Todo/ Untested - with your recommendations. I can add you setup program too.

DDLink:

Grzyb wrote on 2024-11-30, 21:55:

Thanks, but I hardly ever have more than one DOS machine running, so I don't really need a DOS<->DOS transfer program...

I found out the same thing, its not my dreamed program, its using own protocol and for Dos to Dos (GUI itself seems good enough-2 panels-tab is working- only hotkeys seems a bit strange). I need to access to Windows 10 share, realiable, which huge memory footprint or SFTP/SCP. SCP-SSH is inbuild encryption is probably heavy on CPU, so it cant be used with very old machine, but my Socket is Socket 7+. I searched if Win10 OpenSSH server inbuild encryption could be lowered or disable, but at least quick search not gave me possitive info. At least on 1 machine i installed SSH server from stratch, without knowing that its know included in windows, so there i may be able to lower security as much as possible, because if im not wrong Microsoft Dos to Windows networking which is alternative is probably very unsecure and unencrypted anyway.
I maybe can use DDLink on my WIndows 10 if there is not native windows version (i had to time to check it, this reply is already quite timely), maybe through ntvdmx64 - https://github.com/leecher1337/ntvdmx64 if its capable networking too, i maybe i can autostart Dosbox "virtual machine" with ddlink on NAS.

I have tried to run it quick, server part was easy, but inbuild help does not give me simply to understand way what to do on client side, so i put it aside, but im not target audience as actually love GUI stuff and cant keep in mind syntax all cli tools and there switches etc on zilllion systems etc.. but im able to remember overall idea which is mostly enough to use goodly designed GUI intuitive fail proof as possible tools even after years of not using of them.

For example really quickly run through Daves tools, FCFT.COM tool caught my eye (i wrote something similar with plain text included when i was 13/14..), nice tool list last files modified, so it tried to use it.. but it took me quite some time to actually make it working. Because im used on /? for help in dos or /help.. or even --help from Linux, but its actually using "?" . After there is some summary -too high level, command help also not helped much a Readme was wall of text. So best help was actually *.ini file.. and even some hints are were unclear and it needed multiple tries to make it find what i searched for.
Im sure that a lots of people will find out great, but designer part of me suffered, even cli tools could be designed more user friendly.

Regardless, i was about to ask if i can add some of your tools into my ultimate package. By some accident your dhcp utility seems to be there already, i usually tried to contact authors of utilities before added, if they were not described as free, im not adding inside any abadonware and other questionable utils, i just recommend some paid stuff like QEMM and have my configs ready to use them.
Especialy your collection of packet drivers is nice, i had not time try find out if i can somehow extract it from that boot floppy *.exe as whole pack, there at least a new which are not in package, in other hand im glad that i had majority of them ready 6 years ago.

Otherwise some summary. If we can have some Browser on Dos, its already proven as proof of concept, modern video players / image viewes, Quake 2 and zillion other things, just 2 panels with at least tex gui ftp client should be feasible. I remember SEE picture viewer it was not that heavy on resources, to even non text mode SVGA / FTP client should problem.

I wish to have a bit more time, to check more things before i post reply, there is too much maybe and im not sure etc, but its as it is, virtually 6 years there was silence, i cared about other stuff too.. I was in sometime like listening quiet mode, when i waited for some news, without actually searching for them as i wrote networking is not my thing.

>>DaveDDS wrote on 2024-11-30, 15:08:
>>I don't think it mentions NEOS.NET - http://ftp.carnet.hr/pub/pub/pc/networking/NeOS/
>
>I read quite a lot guides and articles and tested a lot of stuff, never
>came in contact with this at least not something heavily recommended and
>used. You have to cut corners \ scope somewhere.
>Now its recommended, so if there would be some new round of testing it
>with be included, so i added to description - Todo/ Untested - with your
>recommendations. I can add you setup program too.

I did use it quite a bit back in the day... It's a bit unusual with other
systems showing up as subdirectories of a single network drive... but it did
work well for me... I did write my own SETUP program for it which made it a
lot simpler for me to set up on a system. I has been years though!

>DDLink:
>
>I found out the same thing, its not my dreamed program, its using own
>protocol and for Dos to Dos
> ...
>I maybe can use DDLink on my WIndows 10 if there is not native windows
>version (i had to time to check it, this reply is already quite timely),
>maybe through ntvdmx64 - https://github.com/leecher1337/ntvdmx64 if its
>capable networking too, i maybe i can autostart Dosbox "virtual machine"
>with ddlink on NAS.

There's no Win32 native version, but it does work very well in DosBox with the
virtual NE2000 network interface... I use it all the time to move things to
and from DOS and modern desktop.

The main reason it's doesn't use a common transfer protocol is that it was
originally designed for Serial/Parallel transfers, I added NET later, and
didn't want to have to mess with network setup, so therefore network basically
works the same as a dedicated cable. It really is intended to be a VERY easy
way to move stuff from one system to another, even if they've not been
previously set up to do so.

>I have tried to run it quick, server part was easy, but inbuild help
>does not give me simply to understand way what to do on client side

There is DDLINK.TXT which shows details of the various functions. Also after
initial "hello" message, bottom of screen shows available commands.

Simply switch to the side you want to access. Up/Down to select a file, then
C)opy to the transfer to the other side (or M)ulti to select multiple files
to copy at once)

>Regardless, i was about to ask if i can add some of your tools into my
>ultimate package.

Yes, or course. It's always good to have things available elsewhere.. Just
today my site seems to have gone "bye bye" - and the friend who's giving me
space on his server seems to have disappeared ... looks like I might have
to find another place to put it (anyone have a suggestion of a good/free place
where I can host a site in hand-coded HTML)

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

DaveDDS wrote on 2024-12-03, 05:45:

.... Just today my site seems to have gone "bye bye" ...

It's working again for now...

Regarding transfer to/from "modern" Windows systems...

For anyone who doesn't already use DosBox, I've updated my distribution (on my site)
with a better DBSETUP which makes it much easier to get it setup and running on a new system.

I've also added DDLINK to the included tools.

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

ruthan wrote on 2024-12-03, 01:42:

>DDLink:

Please forgive the >old-style-quoting
I prepared this response offline.

>its using ownprotocol and for Dos to Dos

Well, I did kinda say this in my initial message where I advised of DDLINK and
that it might be applicable... (Perhaps you didn't feel like reading that part?)

>>It uses it's own protocol to transfer (basically the same messages over
>>network, serial or parallel) - this protocol is documented in detail within
>>the DDLINK documentation ...
>>
>>Over a network the protocol is contained within "raw" packets, is not based
>>on IP or any other common network protocol. It therefore cannot be routed and
>>works on the local network only).
>>- A major plus is that it required no setup, address assignment etc.

>I need to access to Windows 10 share...

I've moved lot of stuff between DOS system and Win7/Win10 systems.
DDLINK itself is not Win32, but it does work very well under DosBox, which does
run on Win32 just fine.

I've recently updated my own DosBox distribution to improve it's SETUP program
which makes it quite a bit easier to configure it on a new system!

>(GUI itself seems good enough-2 panels-tab is working-

FWIW, It's not technically a GUI (Graphical User Interface). DDLINK uses text
screens presented through the text windowing library built into my compiler, no
graphics!

>only hotkeys seems a bit strange).

I'd appreciate any feedback on how exactly it's "strange". I *thought* I'd made
it fairly easy to figure out and use, but it's always hard to make such judgements
about your own work... (for some reason everything I design seems "obvious" to
me 😀

In this case, the two sides are presented as "directory lists", one on each side
of the screen... You can pick systems (sides) with right/left, and files with
up/down, PgUp/PgDn etc. The selected system/file is shown by the hilighted
directory entry.

The commands you can perform are shown along the bottom of the screen:
" A)ttr C)opy D)rive E)rase M)ult N)ew O)ption R)ename V)iew CR=Cd ESC=Quit"
I *thought* it was fairly obvious that:
- To change attributes (or timestamp) of a file, press 'A'
- To copy a file/directory (to the other side), press 'C'
- To switch to a different drive, press 'D'
- To erase a file or directory, press 'E'
- To perform operations on multiple files at once, press 'M'
- To create a new directory, press 'N'
- To change DDLINK options, press 'O'
- To rename a file or directory press 'R'
- To View a file (text or hex), press 'V'
- To switch to a new directory, press Carriage-Return
- To quit DDLINK, press ESC

I admit, wanting to take no more than one line from the screen, this command
"help" is not super-detailed. As there are confirmation prompts for dangerous
operations, a bit of experimentation should have provided a pretty good feel
for what these operations were going to do.

And... All functions are described in detail in the enclosed documentation file
DDLINK.TXT - but I do get that my choice to use such an obscure way to present
this information is difficult for many people to read (what the heck are .TXT
files? - what vendors "app" do I use to read it)

I originally designed DDLINK because it was something I needed and didn't have
plans to publish it - so it does "think a bit like me"....

I also wanted it to be simple and small, as I wanted one simple program I could
easily copy to/from a new system and not have to worry about installing or
configuring it... (I wrote the documents after I decided to make it available
to others - and kinda hoped that anyone interested in the program might read them)

So... I'm not keen on the idea of making it bigger, but I've made a trial
version with internal help screens... just press '?' in most places.

It relies on an accompanying DDLINK.HLP which it looks for in the same
directory from which DDLINK.COM was loaded!

The good news is that DDLINK.HLP isn't required! DDLINK will run just fine
without it - just the '?' help screens will not work!

I'm attaching DDLTST.ZIP to this message (it only has an updated DDLINK.COM and
DDLINK.HLP - use docs and other files from the original DDLINK distribution on
my site.

I can easily update the help text... any improvements or other revisions you'd
care to suggest are welcome!

Let me know if you find this to be a major enough improvement to make it usable,
and if so, I'll update the above mentioned original distribution.

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

Ok, I've updated my update to DDLINK 😀

Instead of adding DDLINK.HLP and the code to read/display the linked help file
into DDLINK itself, I have put all the extra help material into DDLHLP.EXE

This keeps DDLINK.COM quite a bit smaller and therefore easier to move around,
bootstrap etc. The only code added to it is to recognize the '?' key and chain
to DDLHLP.

The help effectively looks/acts the same as it did before.

I've updated my previous attachment accordingly!

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

RE: DDLINK UPDATE

DaveDDS wrote on 2024-12-09, 18:02:

Ok, I've updated my update to DDLINK 😀

Noticed that DDLINK SRC file was updated on Dec 1, 2024, but I still see the STATUS page (.../src/STATUS.TXT) having current change date of 24/10/22 .
I've refreshed the browser several times to be sure. Can you confirm dates/files update status on that page pls.

konc wrote on 2023-10-31, 10:55:

lowlytech wrote on 2023-10-30, 20:21:

I have looked a bit and haven't came up with anything. Was looking for an FTP client to run in DOS 5.0 that would work on a 286 that has an interface similar to dosshell or norton commander. Does such a thing exist? All I can seem to find is command line clients for DOS.

Fir this reason exactly I ended up running the ftp server on the retro machines, managing transfers from a modern client on my daily driver

MTCP's FTP Server does this job perfectly.

xa3d wrote on 2024-12-12, 08:41:

RE: DDLINK UPDATE […]
Show full quote

RE: DDLINK UPDATE

DaveDDS wrote on 2024-12-09, 18:02:

Ok, I've updated my update to DDLINK 😀

Noticed that DDLINK SRC file was updated on Dec 1, 2024, but I still see the STATUS page (.../src/STATUS.TXT) having current change date of 24/10/22 .
I've refreshed the browser several times to be sure. Can you confirm dates/files update status on that page pls.

I've not updated the source release yet - been kinda waiting to see if any more negative feedback
before "setting in stone" (I'm also still making some minor "tweaks").
Once I do I'll make sure status date is correct (I'll try to do that in the next couple days).

Also note that there was a major failure in the site and I had to re-upload everything...
might have been a few timestamp glitches during this process - best to trust STATUS.

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

DaveDDS wrote on 2024-12-12, 13:21:

I've not updated the source release yet ...

Ok, I've updated the site with the latest DDLINK (executable) and source code.

Dave ::: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com ::: "Daves Old Computers"->Personal

DaveDDS wrote on 2024-12-12, 14:15:

Ok, I've updated the site with the latest DDLINK (executable) and source code.

Much appreciated!

I found at least some graphical FTP clients for Windows 3.11:
https://winworldpc.com/product/ws-ftp/le
There is also Total Commander for Win3.11 - https://www.ghisler.com/wcmd16.htm , it has FTP client too, i tested 16bit version it on Window 95.
Its not Dos i was never Win 3.xx use, but if my memory servers you can boot in Dos, start Win 3.11 and return to Dos, it could be quicker than reboot to more modern OS.

Seems odd ... you wanted file transfer for DOS, DDLINK is "too complicated"
mostly because you would have to put DosBox on a windows system to move
files to/from.

The DOS side of the DDLINK solution requires DDLINK and a packet driver,
2 files maybe 20k in size, and doesn't have to be "installed".

If you use the MB6 DosBox I have on my site, it needs 6 files, abnout 2 megs
in size and also does not need to be "installed".

-- but a "better" solution would be "installing" Win3 (incl getting network
workigng) and an FTP client on the DOS side (I don't have a Win3 system
running anymore, but IIRC it's a LOT mode files, size and work).

and getting an FTP server inatalled and working on the Windows end.

If you want Win3 and FTP client/server, sure ... but as a simple way to move
files to/from DOS ... seems odd (to me)

Re: DDLINK: Easily move files between/To/From DOS systems