Hi Lucho, Tom, others,
I think before we all start buying SoftICE (yes, it is a bit old but seems
to be very useful), try something else: BOCHS.
http://bochs.sourceforge.net/ or something... Bochs has a BUILTIN
debugger. Like you start Bochs on a Windows or Linux shell window
(DOS box, xterm, ...). Then a new window shows up (the "screen" of
the simulated PC) and - if configured to do so - the debugger starts
up in the shell window. You can do some debugging FIRST if you want,
or just type "continue" (or similar, check the help function of the
debugger) to let the virtual PC boot. You can debug virtually
everything. For example you can even set a breakpoint at the moment
where protected mode is entered without knowing at which address this
will happen. And you can continue debugging inside protected mode.
All nice features, but based on the SIMULATED processor inside Bochs
which - bad feature - makes the simulation slow.

On the other hand you can "boot" several Bochs windows at the same
time and "reboot" quickly. And you get crash dumps in the logfile.

Now about licenses:
There are some nice short licenses like X11/Expat/BSD'/Artistic'/
Perl. Check the list on the gnu.org pages for more details.
And of course there is public domain. Public domain is fine for
small programs (like my CPULEVEL one). However, it does not protect
anything. Somebody could take the code, cut and paste it into some
other product and start selling it as closed source. So for bigger
projects I prefer more "forced open" licenses like GPL and LGPL/BSD.
The point about LGPL / BSD is that you can use the code in closed
source projects (I think Windows contains parts under BSD license)
as long as you keep a way open for the user to get the source code
of those parts at no excessive extra costs (e.g. MS has some code
online for download). GPL is more restrictive: You have to make the
WHOLE sources open source if you compile something with GPLed
sources inside. As others already told this does not mean that the
compiler itself or the runtime libraries of the compiler are forced
to be open source. Even GPL allows you (of course) to put some
closed source or even non-free binaries and some binaries made from
GPLed code together on one disk, to create a Linux / FreeDOS / ...
distro.

As long as you do not compile open and closed together into one
binary, GPL is happy, roughly speaking. For executable packers this
means: You could call the unpacking stub part of what is added due
to the compilation process. Or you could open the sources of the
(usually very short) unpacking stub. In either case you do not need
to open the sources of the executable packer itself.
Yes, GPL is very long. But people know it and it seems to be
carefully designed so that even lawyers can understand it. This
does not stop you from using much simpler licenses if you prefer to
do so.

I personally would like to have a short license like: You can use
this code for free but have to keep the original copyright notice
... if you combine it with other code to create a single binary,
you have to open that other source code, too. You can of course put
my program on a disk with other programs with other licenses. You
shall not remove any copyright messages from my program. You may
not use the program for military, "intelligence" or other potentially
inhumane or violent purposes. You are encouraged to tell me both if
the program works fine and if it does not (e.g. because it has a bug
or you have enhancement suggestions). I do not promise anything about
the program. It seems to work for me, but if your computer falls into
pieces then you cannot blame me - although I would be happy about a
bug report if it really is my program which caused that.

GPL comes pretty close to that, but uses longish legalese language.
And I miss a statement about "humane" use. I know that some people
think that violence can help to prevent other violence. But in most
wars, BOTH parties feel like having the more noble reasons, so...


If you have questions about Bochs, please start another thread.
Just wanted to point at an alternative to SoftICE. If Borland 386
optimization uses 386 registers, you better do "pushad" - but then,
is it WORTH the hassles? Just use 286 optimization.

More interesting topic might be the license issue, so THAT part of
this thread is encouraged to grow a bit :-).

Eric.


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
Freedos-kernel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-kernel

Reply via email to