Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

Hi, > I'd suggest using 0xC3 0x00 as a magic number for any non-8086 executable. > Or, for preference, using a 4-byte magic number: 0xC3 0x00 0x00 followed by > a byte giving the supported CPU architecture. Then the logic in the loader > would be: > Here’s an easier solution. Follow the patter

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Antony Gordon wrote: Hi, It’s all semantics. Most signatures are MZ, but some old linkers (not sure if they are even in use) used ZM according to RBIL Values for the executable types understood by various environments: MZ old-style DOS executable (see #01594

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

Hi, It’s all semantics. Most signatures are MZ, but some old linkers (not sure if they are even in use) used ZM according to RBIL Values for the executable types understood by various environments: MZ old-style DOS executable (see #01594

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Antony Gordon wrote: > Hi, > > See my other email. In DOS, MZ=ZM, I guess Microsoft changed course at > some point. They are typically called MZ executables. I was specifically referring to the specific magic number that would show up as "ZM" in a text editor. All the files

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

Hi, See my other email. In DOS, MZ=ZM, I guess Microsoft changed course at some point. They are typically called MZ executables. > On Jun 8, 2015, at 8:55 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Antony Gordon wrote: > >> Hi >> >> >>> Do "ZM" EXEs actually exist? >>> >> >> Yes. A

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

Hi > > I'd suggest using 0xC3 0x00 as a magic number for any non-8086 executable. > Or, for preference, using a 4-byte magic number: 0xC3 0x00 0x00 followed by > a byte giving the supported CPU architecture. Then the logic in the loader > would be: > > 0xC3 0x00 0x00-> run as native EXE >

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

And I said MJ for Michael Jordan not Michael Jackson. On 09/06/2015 10:51 am, "Steve Nickolas" wrote: > On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Antony Gordon wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > >> Do "ZM" EXEs actually exist? > >> > > > > Yes. Any 16-bit MS-DOS target compiler generates MZ executables. FreeDOS > is full of t

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Antony Gordon wrote: > Hi > > >> Do "ZM" EXEs actually exist? >> > > Yes. Any 16-bit MS-DOS target compiler generates MZ executables. FreeDOS is > full of them. I said ZM, not MZ. -uso. --

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

Hi > Do "ZM" EXEs actually exist? > Yes. Any 16-bit MS-DOS target compiler generates MZ executables. FreeDOS is full of them. > I've also been curious as to what the format is for .TOS binaries (since > GEMDOS has such a similar API to MS-DOS). > Grab one and run it through a hex editor.

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, John Elliott wrote: >> If you can mark the EXEs as something other than MZ, you could perhaps >> make a TSR loader stub that loads an x86 emulator on demand to run EXE >> files. >> >> COM... I think you're gonna be stuck with using only an EXE format because >> trying to detect

Re: [Freedos-devel] 32-bit FreeDOS

> If you can mark the EXEs as something other than MZ, you could perhaps > make a TSR loader stub that loads an x86 emulator on demand to run EXE > files. > > COM... I think you're gonna be stuck with using only an EXE format because > trying to detect a COM file by architecture is fraught with

Re: [Freedos-devel] FreeDOS 2.0

If there were only retail copies of FreeDOS. On Fri, May 29, 2015, 10:25 AM JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote: > 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!