Hi,
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Louis Santillan wrote:
>
> IIRC, BasicLinux and other UMSDOS Linuxes would not boot/load with
> EMM386 as they would put the CPU into V86 mode. After such, loadlin,
> et. al., could not recapture control of the CPU and reload the GDT.
I can't remember if DOS-
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Jose Antonio Senna
wrote:
>
> On 2 january Antony Gordon said:
> > Try Loadlin with no memory managers installed.
>
> Good idea. It worked.
>
> I was using HIMEMX only, no EMM.
> Removing the line in CONFIG.SYS much reduced available low
> memory, but
IIRC, BasicLinux [0] and other UMSDOS Linuxes would not boot/load with
EMM386 as they would put the CPU into V86 mode. After such, loadlin,
et. al., could not recapture control of the CPU and reload the GDT
[1].
[0] http://distro.ibiblio.org/baslinux/
[1] http://wiki.osdev.org/GDT_Tutorial
On T
Try Loadlin with no memory managers installed.
> On Dec 29, 2016, at 11:49 PM, Ralf Quint wrote:
>
> On 12/29/2016 4:00 PM, Jose Antonio Senna wrote:
>> So no, it's not reasonable to expect FreeDOS to work under a
>>> running Win95. It may be possible in theory (if someone
>>> fixed the bugs),
On Fri, 30 Dec 2016, Ralf Quint wrote:
> On 12/30/2016 6:57 AM, Steve Nickolas wrote:
>> *I* did it, but that was many years ago. I do remember the VDM didn't
>> work.
> What I remember (granted, getting old LOL) was that someone had 3.0
> starting but then couldn't do much beyond that. Not aware
On 12/30/2016 6:57 AM, Steve Nickolas wrote:
> *I* did it, but that was many years ago. I do remember the VDM didn't
> work.
What I remember (granted, getting old LOL) was that someone had 3.0
starting but then couldn't do much beyond that. Not aware that anyone
every got it working (beyond a me
> Maybe I'm
> the wrong one to still be talking about this since I don't know the
> gory details.
yep.
Tom
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sd
> There is no MS-DOS 7, despite what people are trying to tell. That
> "Boot part" if Windows 9x will identify itself as DOS version 7,
> but never was a standalone version of DOS.
Actually, with a little bit of tweaking, it can be -- I do it all of the time.
The two main things you need to do a
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Jose Antonio Senna
wrote:
> Rugxulo said:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Jose Antonio Senna
>> wrote:
>
>>> I booted FreeDOS kernel 2042 from a floppy in a W98SE
>>> machine, and it seems to run OK.
>
>> So no, it's not reasonable to expect FreeDOS t
On Fri, 30 Dec 2016, Ralf Quint wrote:
> On 12/29/2016 8:52 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote:
>>
>>> NO version of Windows will start from FreeDOS, not 3.x nor any 9x...
>> I know 3.1 did in the past, with provisos, did that regress?
> Sorry but I am not aware that anyone has successfully been able to do
On 12/29/2016 8:52 PM, Steve Nickolas wrote:
>
>> NO version of Windows will start from FreeDOS, not 3.x nor any 9x...
> I know 3.1 did in the past, with provisos, did that regress?
Sorry but I am not aware that anyone has successfully been able to do
that...
>
>> There is no MS-DOS 7, despite wh
On Thu, 29 Dec 2016, Ralf Quint wrote:
> On 12/29/2016 4:00 PM, Jose Antonio Senna wrote:
>> So no, it's not reasonable to expect FreeDOS to work under a
>>> running Win95. It may be possible in theory (if someone
>>> fixed the bugs), but nobody has done it (yet, AFAIK).
>>I did not say Win95
On 12/29/2016 4:00 PM, Jose Antonio Senna wrote:
> So no, it's not reasonable to expect FreeDOS to work under a
>> running Win95. It may be possible in theory (if someone
>> fixed the bugs), but nobody has done it (yet, AFAIK).
>I did not say Win95, I said Win98SE, and I did not try to
> run
13 matches
Mail list logo