Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS
Hello all, I can do the development. I have time and like programming (i have an own OS bird os...yes i like birds). If that was the question. But my question is, why should you switch tot 32-bit? It have a lot features But MS-DOS is and was 16-bit. If we switch to 32-bit do you get Windows rather then the original 16-bit MS-DOS. Greetings, Maarten Op 28 mei 2015 23:38 schreef Georg Potthast mail...@georgpotthast.de: My thought is: who shall do the development? There is no one around that would spend the time to develop this. - Original Message - From: Antony Gordon cuzint...@gmail.com To: Technical discussion and questions for FreeDOS developers. freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 10:47 PM Subject: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS I was re-reading some emails and I think I have an idea of how this would work. The goal is existing compatibility so that older DOS applications will run. Obviously, moving to 32-bit will eliminate most of the older processors, HOWEVER. by implementing a Windows 9x like model and build a 32-bit kernel to supplant the 16-bit kernel, we can then spawn 16-bit VM under a 32-bit kernel to run each 16-bit application, as well as develop 32-bit applications. The important pieces I believe that need to be figured out is the VMM (Virtual Machine Manager) and the DOS Extender. I only suggest Windows 9x because it was still able to utilize real mode DOS drivers. Thoughts? -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS
Eric, I only mentioned the Windows portion because it would tie in compatibility on the Microsoft side of things for classic software, not necessarily to re-invent Windows 3.x or Windows 9x. I'll try to elaborate more. If you strip the GUI from MS Windows, you have 3 important parts that run to implement 32-bit protected mode. KRNL386, DOSX (the DOS Extender) and a virtual machine manager. If we were able to recreate those three components and build them in such a way that they are compatible with Windows virtual device drivers, we'd have a 32-bit extension to FreeDOS that we could use At the core of it's existence, The portions of the Windows 3.x subsystem that tie into DOS in 386 Enhanced mode consists of a DPMI server and a virtual machine manager of sorts. Microsoft patches certain aspects of DOS when Windows runs. In 1993, we were at best guessing (unless you had an OEM NDA) what was going on and depending on Andrew Schulmann et. al. to provide insight. Now, that we can clearly see what was done (more or less), we can implement a similar concept, but a different way. FreeDOS presently appears to run in protected mode (I found that out trying to run Windows in enhanced mode). The error message that Windows gave was that the processor was already in protected mode. Microsoft demonstrated a means of providing multitasking and 32-bit functionality on top of a 16-bit OS through the development of Windows 3.x and Windows 9x. If we are able to build a 32-bit subsystem that can utilize the device drivers and other existing components of the 32-bit Microsoft subsystem (Win32s or Windows 9x) then FreeDOS gains a 32-bit option that provides the backwards compatibility that is needed to meet spec. If, by doing that, running Windows applications becomes a possibility, that is only a side benefit. The other alternative is to find a way to implement the DOS API completely in a 32-bit address space, which alienates the older applications. On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:55 PM, Eric Auer e.a...@jpberlin.de wrote: Hi :-) 1. Start FreeDOS (16-bit mode) 2. Start FreeDOS-32 via a separate executable (it would only be installed if it detected a 32-bit capable processor), perhaps call it FD32. It would switch to protected mode and spawn a protected mode shell. http://freedos-32.sourceforge.net/ already exists. No news since 2011. FD32 runs more parts in 32-bit, but the advantages compared to using a classic DOS together with a DPMI compatible DOS extender are minimal. The other possibility During the install, determine if the computer can support 32-bit instruction set If so, install FreeDOS and install the FreeDOS 32-bit components (provide an option to only run the 16-bit OS) FreeDOS 32 starts automatically by running the initial 16-bit environment, then spawning the 32-bit environment to take over. We once pondered this as part of the ISO boot process. But because it is almost impossible to boot from CD on 8086 or 286 computers, we dropped the idea. Instead, just take a floppy with a special 16 bit, 8086 compatible version of DOS if you have such old hardware. The ISO simply assumes that you have 386 or newer hardware anyway. Interestingly, 8086 or PC-XT compatible FreeDOS floppy distros are actively discussed here and even updated at this very moment :-) All existing drivers developed for FD16 would work. If we use the Windows SDK to clean build the 32-bit environment, then perhaps we can use Win9x drivers (if they are even still available). You cannot use Win9x drivers for DOS software. Also, you cannot use Windows for Workgroups 3.11 in 386 enhanced mode and expect it to behave well: It will use built-in 32 bit disk and FAT drivers which do not work well at all with modern things like FAT32, LBA, SATA. You can disable those drivers, but running WfW 3.11 in that mode is like running Win9x in safe mode: A lot of comfort gets lost. If you want to enjoy Windows 3 in FreeDOS, use Windows 3.0 or 3.1 and use standard mode, not WfW 3.11 - even 386enh mode of 3.0 / 3.1 is very fragile as all your drivers have to cooperate and let Windows take over as the boss of your protected mode infrastructure, locking the DOS kernel into a vm86 bubble with a task switching wrapper around it. FreeDOS tries to support that in newer kernels, but this stays really hard to do well because basically Microsoft Windows is only skilled in making bubbles around Microsoft DOS, so we can only try to be very similar in the parts to which the 386enh bubble sticks. Otherwise, we’d have to clean room Win NT to implement a 32-bit OS and ReactOS is still in alpha... If you want to use 32 bit Windows programs (beyond Win32s for 3.x), you do not have the option to use DOS for that. You must use either ReactOS or Linux with Wine or a closed source OS like OS/2 or actual Microsoft Windows. In some cases, Japheth's HX / HXRT for DOS will be able to run really lightweight Windows
Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS
Hi Anthony, please explain in which way Windows WITHOUT a GUI would be something that we want to add to FreeDOS: There already are really good, free and open DPMI based DOS extenders for DOS. FreeDOS itself is not running in protected mode, but every EMM386 style software must use protected mode (not to be confused with EMS hardware solutions for old computers) and Windows in 386 enhanced mode is not compatible with normal EMM386. Instead, it uses an exotic interface called GEMMIS to REPLACE EMM386 on the fly. This only works with non-free versions, for example Microsoft EMM386. The solution is to use either the Microsoft version or simply not use EMM386. In some cases, HIMEM and similar drivers can cause similar problems, but again, you can use the Microsoft drivers :-) Microsoft mainly patches DOS when it tries to put it into a protected mode bubble to be able to run DOS windows in a Windows session. In standard mode, Windows is more like a normal program for DOS, which makes things easier :-) As described earlier in this thread, you do have to edit your Windows config AND you have to use special versions of the FreeDOS kernel to support that bubble wrapping or patching of FreeDOS for 386enh Windows compatibility. If Windows can not figure out how to patch DOS, it will give a similar error message to the already protected mode one. Microsoft demonstrated a means of providing multitasking and 32-bit functionality on top of a 16-bit OS through the development of Windows 3.x and Windows 9x. If we are able to build a 32-bit subsystem that can utilize the device drivers and other existing components of the 32-bit Microsoft subsystem (Win32s or Windows 9x) then FreeDOS gains a 32-bit option that provides the backwards compatibility that is needed to meet spec. Everything that you mention in the previous paragraph is useful only for graphical Windows software: To summarize, you really should try Linux with Wine, or ReactOS for it. Regards, Eric PS: Even running only multiple DOS Windows in Windows is already something that does need the GUI of Windows, too. But you can work with DOS task swappers, as TriDOS :-) They swap between different (full screen) DOS sessions. This is not related to how many bits your Windows has. -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 2.0
If only there was a holographic FreeDOS (Like for the Samsung SMart window,or Microsoft's hololense).If there was a holographic FreeDOS,I would throw a party.(Think how cool that would be!). On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote: Correction... FreeDOS 1.2. Not 2.0. On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Antony Gordon cuzint...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, If I were building the FreeDOS distribution, the only thing that would be included as a part of the official FreeDOS install would be the components that make up the OS depending on the MS/PC DOS version distribution we wanted to emulate. I would also supply these files as one complete ZIP file instead of individual files as they make up the core of what you expect to have available when using DOS. I think that is all the FreeDOS installer should install. Everything else should be separate. All the other stuff would be fluff, like GEM, NDN, and the developer tools. If the final line in the sand is that without source it can’t be included, I think a list of where to find stuff would be useful to find the tools or applications needed. On May 28, 2015, at 3:52 PM, Mercury Thirteen mercury0x0...@gmail.com wrote: Although it is freeware, source code for NDN appears to be unavailable. Given this project's push towards 100% open software, I am inclined to exclude it from the FreeDOS 2.0 image. Any thoughts? -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel -- ___ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
