Re: [Freedos-user] Best virtual machine for FreeDOS 1.2
Thank you Bernd and Ruxgulo for your help. I am using VMware Player because I've used Vmware Server before, I suppose they are somehow similar. I also have Bochs to give it a try... Bernd: I didn't know DOS emulation wasn so difficult... more than 20 options to make a choice! On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Rugxulo wrote: > Hi, quick reply (as it takes too long to think things like this > through, it's a complicated question), > > On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:17 AM, the bcpino wrote: >> >> I usually use VirtualBox, but as Jack said, it didn't emulate well >> some old hardware. > > It's "mostly" fine but doesn't like UIDE. Not a surprise, so not a > deal breaker (though on real hardware UIDE is much more > indispensable). > >> Which one should I use? QEMU, some VMware "gratis". > > VMware is reputedly pretty good, but I've never bothered, too lazy. > Bernd (as mentioned) seems to love it, and you can use Eduardo's > VMSMOUNT, so that's a big incentive right there. (I really need to > test it one of these days.) > > QEMU is okay (and VirtualBox is partially based upon it) but quite > slow (last I checked a while back). It also doesn't fully emulate > segments, so some stuff (e.g. 286 16-bit pmode) won't work correctly. > Also getting newer Win32 builds seems problematic (while VirtualBox > has no problem). > >> I need SB16 and network emulation, controlling CPU cycles (I don't >> want to burn my PC) > > IIRC, VirtualBox will let you choose what percent of the cpu to > utilize. Also, newer FreeDOS kernels have a CONFIG.SYS option > IDLEHALT, which you may find interesting (though offhand I don't know > if it helps, or FDAPM, or what). > > I have not tried a lot of heavy stuff under VirtualBox lately, too > lazy, also tend to just use DOSEMU or native FreeDOS here instead. BUT > ... FASM author's Kelvar (32-bit flat real) demo worked in VirtualBox > 4.x on this VT-X cpu (Westmere, Nehalem, 32nm), and it used both SB > .WAV playing and graphics. Oh, and the PCNTPK (or whatever, aka > AMDPD.ZIP) packet driver also works under VirtualBox, apparently, as I > successfully tested the DOS port of Dillo, my own sloppy compile of > Lynx, and various mTCP stuff. > > So just FYI, it will probably "mostly" work for you, and fairly > quickly too. But some better functionality may?? require VT-X. Others > are fairly good too (DOSBox, Bochs) but slower. > > Just don't get your hopes up too high (then they can't be dashed, heh). ;-) > > -- > Try before you buy = See our experts in action! > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 > ___ > Freedos-user mailing list > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user -- Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Best virtual machine for FreeDOS 1.2
Hi, quick reply (as it takes too long to think things like this through, it's a complicated question), On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 11:17 AM, the bcpino wrote: > > I usually use VirtualBox, but as Jack said, it didn't emulate well > some old hardware. It's "mostly" fine but doesn't like UIDE. Not a surprise, so not a deal breaker (though on real hardware UIDE is much more indispensable). > Which one should I use? QEMU, some VMware "gratis". VMware is reputedly pretty good, but I've never bothered, too lazy. Bernd (as mentioned) seems to love it, and you can use Eduardo's VMSMOUNT, so that's a big incentive right there. (I really need to test it one of these days.) QEMU is okay (and VirtualBox is partially based upon it) but quite slow (last I checked a while back). It also doesn't fully emulate segments, so some stuff (e.g. 286 16-bit pmode) won't work correctly. Also getting newer Win32 builds seems problematic (while VirtualBox has no problem). > I need SB16 and network emulation, controlling CPU cycles (I don't > want to burn my PC) IIRC, VirtualBox will let you choose what percent of the cpu to utilize. Also, newer FreeDOS kernels have a CONFIG.SYS option IDLEHALT, which you may find interesting (though offhand I don't know if it helps, or FDAPM, or what). I have not tried a lot of heavy stuff under VirtualBox lately, too lazy, also tend to just use DOSEMU or native FreeDOS here instead. BUT ... FASM author's Kelvar (32-bit flat real) demo worked in VirtualBox 4.x on this VT-X cpu (Westmere, Nehalem, 32nm), and it used both SB .WAV playing and graphics. Oh, and the PCNTPK (or whatever, aka AMDPD.ZIP) packet driver also works under VirtualBox, apparently, as I successfully tested the DOS port of Dillo, my own sloppy compile of Lynx, and various mTCP stuff. So just FYI, it will probably "mostly" work for you, and fairly quickly too. But some better functionality may?? require VT-X. Others are fairly good too (DOSBox, Bochs) but slower. Just don't get your hopes up too high (then they can't be dashed, heh). ;-) -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
Re: [Freedos-user] Best virtual machine for FreeDOS 1.2
Op 4-2-2012 18:17, the bcpino schreef: > Dear friends: > > I usually use VirtualBox, but as Jack said, it didn't emulate well > some old hardware. VirtualBox and VirtualPC have some flaky implementations at times indeed, unfortunately. > Which one should I use? QEMU, some VMware "gratis". QEMU is a reasonable option (ReactOS project has some decent win32 binaries), Bochs might also be. The free VMware Player performs decently. > I need SB16 and network emulation, controlling CPU cycles (I don't > want to burn my PC) Usually some kind of DOSIDLE program should be sufficient. Decent machines should be able to handle full system load instead of overheating, with only disadvantage of it getting warmer and likely louder. Maybe someday operating systems will have an option for 'keep this program's use of CPU/RAM below nn percent of total system resources'. > P.S. Please I don't want to start any flame war, just need opinions. I'll tell you what criteria I'm using in my decision, with so far favoring Bochs despite not meeting all criteria (no single emulator does, unfortunately..). In other words, I'm adding Bochs to FreeDOS 1.2 CD so people can try FreeDOS installation process in Windows (to RAMdisk that is..). [01] emulator must run on at least win32 [02] emulator must run on at least 80686 architecture [03] emulator must have small disk footprint [04] emulator must consist of only few files, preferably just 1 [05] emulator must be able to use host (virtual) CD drive [06] emulator must be able to use ISO file [07] emulator files must allow 8.3 naming for FAT12/16/32 and ISO9660 [08] emulator must function while running from read-only storage (CD) [09] emulator must be free to distribute [10] emulator must be opensource [11] emulator must allow easy configuration despite read-only [12] a recent or uptodate version of the emulator is available [13] emulator must provide an x86 virtual machine, 386+ is acceptable [14] good performance inside the VM [15] VM is ATX compatible, optionally also APM and/or ACPI [16] Memory granularity preferably as small as possible (1MB) [17] Inside the VM, support for above 4GB RAM [18] Inside the VM, support of between 2GB and 4GB RAM [19] Inside the VM, support of between 4MB and 2GB RAM [20] Inside the VM, support of between 2MB and 4MB RAM [21] Inside the VM, support of between 1MB and 2MB RAM [22] ISO9660 El-Torito non-emulation boot mode supported Bochs fails for [11], [14], [17], [18], [21] (BIOS...) Bochs more or less meets [04] Bochs supports all other criteria. QEMU fails for [04], [07], [12], [21] (blame SEABIOS?) QEMU supports all others (not sure about [17] ) VMware fails for [03], [04], [07] up to [11], [20], [21] VMware more or less meets [16] (4MB increments) VMware appears to support all others. Network connectivity seems easiest from VMware, somehow. Shared Folders also nice. VirtualBox: no idea whatsoever. Their openwatcom-based BIOS at [ https://www.virtualbox.org/browser/vbox/trunk/src/VBox/Devices/PC/BIOS-new ] sounds interesting though. Bochs total size is about 1MB (bochs.exe v2.5.1 compressed by UPX 3.08). External system firmware and VGA option ROM files required instead of being integrated into main binary while allowing overriding by external BIOS/VGA files (as VMware does for example). Option passing on the commandline, as QEMU allows, would be convenient (can't modify bochsrc.txt if it's read-only on CD, after all). Omitting config file and option roms would result in single BOCHS.EXE binary. Last but not least, an 'use CD drive from which Bochs is currently being run, as optical drive for VM' would be nice. I haven't looked at SoundBlaster emulation details (most emulators claim to support it) nor stuff like how compatible to packet drivers and iPXE the emulated network cards are. Also not support for floppy, hdd, usb, pxe, pci, ahci, and whatever. Compatibility with Jack's "UIDE.SYS" DOS PCI/IDE CD-ROM driver is a big plus. QEMU was more or less 8.3 names except for the VGA ROM, filename hardcoded in win32 binary. And it insists on logfile writing. The lack of a reliable correctly working win32 binary for QEMU 1.0 means I can't use it. [ http://virtuallyfun.superglobalmegacorp.com/?p=1627 ] win32 1.0 binary fails installation of ReactOS, Windows, Linux and requires lots of extra files being present instead of a single QEMU.EXE best regards and goodluck if you made it reading this far, Bernd Blaauw -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net
