Re: [Freedos-user] I need an example
I would recommend trying to contact the WATT-32 library for such examples... and there is example code on the website, although I'm not sure it's c++. I wasn't clear. Code's the only thing I don't need. It's the build scripts (.bat files, make files, whatever) and examples of how to use the toolchain, that I'm after. If I could use Microsoft VC++ to produce a DOS executable (and I dearly with I could, because then I'd be done), I'd be asking for a project file, so I could see what switches the compiler needed, what libraries to link with, etc. ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] I need an example
I'm on the edge of buying hardware for my embedded project. I've been holding back because I'm nervous about actually assembling the software. Writing the software is no problem - I have my C++ inline assembler coded and pretty much ready to go. What I'm uncomfortable with is the actual process of getting it compiled for DOS, linked with WATT-32, moved to the PC-104 board, and started. What I think I need is someone to show me a trivial C++ program that uses WATT-32, AND the compiler setup, compiler settings, build scripts, and all the other associated toolchain *junk* needed to get it ready to go. In part I'm just spoiled - I've gotten used to just typing code into Microsoft VC++, clicking build and having my executable pop out, finished and ready. The idea of spending days stumbling though compiler settings, memory models, config.sys and everything else is just plain daunting. Does anyone have a build environment they'd be interested in sharing, that I can unpack onto a WIn XP system and get running in a few hours? A compiler installation .zip, and a .bat file that assembles and links sample C++ code and the WATT-32 library should be all I need... ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] (fwd) FDXMS Sources.
Honestly, what's the average age on this list? Eleven? --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] re: QHIMEM 1.3
dos=high,umb device=himem.exe stacks=0,0 stacks - those are for interrupts, right? I mske minimal use of interrupts myself, but I don't know what the packet driver or waterloo TCP is going to do. I do know that at least 6 interrupts can occur simultaneously (3 serial ports, ethernet traffic, timer, and my own hardware signal). rem see above... install=ne2000.com -i 0x60 shell=yourapp.exe OK. It's been awhile since I ran DOS. Given that I'm booting DOS out of a flash memory device, which presumably isn't the fastest thing going, what am I looking at for a start-up time, from power on to the loading of the shell? I know this varies with processor speed, but if someone can tell me 3.2 seconds from my USB thumb drive on a 1.2Ghz Pentium I'll convert from there. Startup time is an issue; the lights don't come on in the room until the app runs. :-) --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] QHIMEM 1.3
I'm getting closer to having my application ready to stick on a TS5500. I'd like to compile it to use real mode, as that's probably simplest, and it ought to fit easily in 640k. So my main concern is to push other stuff into high memory, leaving low memory free for my code and data. Where can I get a reasonably simple autoexec.bat for Freedos that will load just the minimal things, and load things high when that's safe? I don't need a mouse, keyboard, video, or other standard devices; it's just A: (flash card used to hold my app), the packet driver for the ethernet provided by the hardware, and my code. Also, is there a way to kick the command interpreter out of memory? Once my app runs, there is no return to the prompt - power cycle is the only way out. --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] re: FreeDos a good choice for me?
I'd originally posted, asking if FreeDOS is right for my application. Since I've joined the list, I've had one or two people suggest other operating systems, and a bunch of people bickering of the ownership of some wretched piece of software. No one has stepped up and suggested that FreeDOS is going to do what I need. Should I take this as a hint that I'm looking at the wrong OS? (As for ownership, as far as I can tell, the moment you post software to the net, you said goodbye to it. Copyright frequently notwithstanding. I see no way anyone can change that, so for the sake of those of us who don't care who wrote what, as long as it works, could the conversation be taken somewhere private?) --- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] FreeDos a good choice for me?
I'm looking for an OS to run on an embedded system (a 586 based PC104) board. What I need is pretty simple: 1) Access to ethernet, TCP and UDP. (Waterloo should do it.) 2) The ability to hook interrupts. 3) I need to be able to handle serial ports via interrupts; potentially more than 4 ports someday. BIOS/polling will not work. 5) The ability to read and write I/O ports. 6) I need cross compilation of C++ and probably some assembler, on my windows laptop, into a flash card that I can just run my app from, when the board powers on. 7) 32 bit ints I DON'T need: 1) Console/keyboard support. 2) Much over 300k of space (as far as I know. Depends on how big waterloo networking is). 4) memory allocation, file I/O, or (I think) any DOS services, except as needed to get my app loaded and started. There's no disk, console, keyboard, or anything, other than serial and ethernet and I/O ports. (I don't know if ethernet implies using DOS). 5) The ability to exit back to DOS. The only exit is reset or power fail. I'd *LIKE* the following, though they aren't essential: 1) USB support. Someday I might need more serial ports, and if IRQs get tight, I'd like to be able to put them all on a USB port. And what I *really* need: 1) Help. It's been a very long time since I had to think about phases like mixed model or real or protected or extended memory, and I forget how it all works, except for the vague recollection that it was all very, very painful. As I'll likely be mixing C++ and assembler (for the serial ports, probably), I'm looking for information on how to build an executable which OS can run. What tools make sense? (I'm looking at the Digital Mars compiler; good choice?) I'm hoping I don't need to install extended memory drivers, but how do I tell? If anyone can suggest a good book on this stuff, it would be a help. Linux would be a strong contender, except I need to handle interrupts and don't want to write device drivers. (But the built-in support for serial and ethernet is very, very tempting). Is FreeDOS going to be a good choice for me? Thanks for any help. -- www.obsessionaudio.com Music matters. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
[Freedos-user] re: FreeDos a good choice for me?
Hi, did you already try Linux, with your software running as root so that it can access all I/O ports directly? Or maybe RTLinux to get better realtime performance? My concerns with Linux: 1) It has to have some sort of processing in the background to handle ethernet and serial ports - and I can't see what it is doing. If it adds a lot of overhead, I could end up with a performance problem I can't solve. 2) I'd need to write a driver to handle the interrupt I need to deal with directly. DOS will just let me hook it at runtime and won't make a fuss about it. 3) It's multitasking. I have one process, one thread, and it never sleeps; why do I need a scheduler? This is a bulldozer to move a teaspoon of sand. Fiddling with serial ports directly in DOS is as complicated as doing the same without any OS at all, as you explicitly do not want to use drivers for that... To be honest, I don't want an OS. Except for the fact that at power-on I want my app loaded from flash and started, and that I need a framework to run the TS5500's ethernet packet driver on, an OS is very much unwanted. I've seen the assembler for handling a serial port. It's not so bad. My real fear is that I will have trouble mating C++'s memory model assumptions with the assembler's. A fear of tools, not code. Compiling 32bit DOS apps with GNU C++ (djgpp) is quite easy, but you should not expect that hooking interrupts or using the internet would be overly easy. In particular, the DOS packet driver of your network card hooks interrupts, so it will get in the way if you want to do real time stuff. Right, but that's true no matter what. I must handle TCP and UDP traffic. Whether it's DOS, Linux, or bare metal, something has to process the traffic. My realtime requirements aren't hideously demanding, though - there's a simple operation I *must* do 64 times a second, and some other processing that has to finish within a 64th of a second, and I don't think the serial or ethernet traffic will interfere with that enough to matter. Not with a 586 at 133Mhz, anyway. What will be even worse is USB support. Even enabling BIOS support for USB keyboards (just for an example) will already make the system performance a lot more unsteady, as USB is a complex networking protocol and not meant for realtime at all... But it does mean I don't end up handling 8 serial ports someday, and running out of IRQs. I don't need this in the short term. I might never need it at all. I just need to make sure that it's possible. As you said you only need 32bit INTS, you can even use a 16bit compiler as long as you do not need data structures which are more than 64k each. If you use 32bit addressing, for example with DJGPP or OpenWatcom, I tried compiling my code with Watcom. I got extremely strange behaviour - the compiler planted stack checking calls, and the stack checks were *convinced* I needed vast amounts of stack space to proceed with even the first function call out of main(). (I make very little use of the stack.) I gave up and used the Digital Mars compiler, and things got a lot saner. So... try 32bit DOS or 32bit Linux. I doubt that you will have to write device drivers for the latter, there are many drivers available. 64 times a second, I want to increment a 16 bit integer in my application's address space. It's about 2 instructions, and one of them dismisses the interrupt. Linux turns that simple procedure into a song and dance. 32bit DOS sounds right, but I read up on freeDOS-32 and it sounded like it was not ready for prime time. Does someone have a cheap/free 32 bit DOS with integrated TCP/UDP support? -- www.obsessionaudio.com Music matters. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] re: FreeDos a good choice for me?
I tried compiling my code with Watcom. I got extremely strange behaviour - the compiler planted stack checking calls, and the stack checks were *convinced* I needed vast amounts of stack space to proceed with even the first function call out of main(). (I make very little use of the stack.) That's because OpenWatcom's default calling convention uses the stack to pass arguments. To change the default calling convention to, say, something like __cdecl, there should be a compiler option. No, there was something much more dire than that going on. My whole call tree doesn't go more that 8 or 10 functions deep, and it's a rare function that gets passed more than a pair of ints. Certainly no passing of structs or anything large. And no large automatic varibles or arrays, either. So maybe a few hundred words total might have been needed, but it was claiming many thousands. And it apparently calculated the maximum necessary depth at every point in the call tree, because it would trigger a stack overflow on the first call out of main - which made it impossible to figure out which function it really thought, way down the tree, needed all the space. After a half hour of banging around, I downloaded DM, and there were no stack problems. You don't need a 32-bit DOS kernel, but a 16-bit DOS kernel (like freedos's) and a DOS extender like cwsdpmi, dos32a, etc... I'm hoping I don't even need the extender. Unless waterloo TCP is ginormous, there's no reason why my code, DOS, and a packet driver shouldn't fit in 640K. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
