On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 11:55 AM, blame troi <blamet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/2018 11:15 AM, Samuel V. via Freedos-user wrote:
>> Would you use a FreeDOS version that was entirely native to 32 or 64 bits?
> I believe I would. I love the basic simplicity (it's a good simplicity) of
> DOS but memory issues and trying to figure out which extender works with
> which software is bothersome.
> Dream would be a 16-bit "box" mode inside this the 32/64 DOS where I can
> isolate old style apps I want to run.

I believe this has already, indirectly, been partially solved
(obviously, we all already know this):

* DOSBox (portable, uses SDL)
* DOSEMU (even x64, atop Linux)
* VBox or KVM (hardware VT-X)
* NTVDM (ReactOS)

Although to some, simple replacements (e.g. FreeBSD with Clang) are
considered good enough for average native use. (By "simple" I mean the
requirements of a C compiler, shell, text editor, compressor/archiver,
ftp, etc. are relatively simple instead of forcibly emulating all
relevant cpu-specific modes and APIs.)

>> I've thought that it would be a great additional project and that it would
>> definitely make FreeDOS and DOS in general, along with an integrated BIOS,
>> live as a valid OS choice for any user as long as there are PCs, at least
>> x86 ones.

I know the intention is "native", presumably 32-bit, using UEFI. I
don't think FD kernel is very big (comparatively), and certainly
pmode, AMD64, ACPI, etc. is much much more complicated. So I don't
think it's impossible to rewrite it, but so far nobody has done it.

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
Freedos-user mailing list

Reply via email to