I was about to post bugreport at VirtualBox bugtracker, but decided to
double-check the issue first. On my system floppy images change are
correctly recognized. VirtualBox 4.1.4-3.2.3 OSE OpenSUSE 12.1.
On 16.05.12 19:33, Wolfgang Schechinger wrote:
Dear experts,
I have some floppy images I
I was about to post bugreport at VirtualBox bugtracker, but decided to
double-check the issue first. On my system floppy images change are
correctly recognized. VirtualBox 4.1.4-3.2.3 OSE OpenSUSE 12.1.
The issue is that VirtualBox is not posting diskette media-change
status in the BIOS data
Hi Tom,
thanks for checking the int 13 details on VirtualBox!
I was about to post bugreport at VirtualBox bugtracker, but decided to
double-check the issue first. On my system floppy images change are
correctly recognized. VirtualBox 4.1.4-3.2.3 OSE OpenSUSE 12.1.
The issue is that
Tom:
The issue is that VirtualBox is not posting diskette media-change
status in the BIOS data table.
the 'issue' is that VirtualBox clearly states
'floppy without change-line support'
int13/15 returns '01h floppy without change-line support
int13/16 returns '06h change line active or
Jack,
the 'issue' is that VirtualBox clearly states 'floppy without
change-line support'
int13/15 returns '01h floppy without change-line support int13/16
returns '06h change line active or not supported
but UIDE ignores this, and relies on change line support anyway.
You are WRONG,
Jack,
The issue is that VirtualBox is not posting diskette media-change
status in the BIOS data table.
the 'issue' is that VirtualBox clearly states
'floppy without change-line support'
int13/15 returns '01h floppy without change-line support
int13/16 returns '06h change line active or
Jack-181 wrote:
I will NOT cache a drive which cannot tell me when its media has changed,
and I REFUSE to add all of the
logic in UIDE that Eric notes the DOS kernel contains, to find out if a
media-change has occurred using other methods!
It's not impossible to cache floppies, Jack. You
At 09:22 AM 5/23/2012, Jack wrote:
You are WRONG, Tom!!
Sorry, Jack, but he is not
Honestly Jack, please don't explode each time someone is making a
critical statement. There simply is no reason to get all personal about this...
UIDE has NEVER ignored if a diskette has change-line
UIDE has NEVER ignored if a diskette has change-line support! It
does in fact check the BIOS data table at 0:448h for bit 0 (change
line for diskette A:) or bit 4 (change line for diskette B:). If
those bits are off, diskette A: or diskette B: will not be cached.
if UIDE would check
UIDE has NEVER ignored if a diskette has change-line support! It
does in fact check the BIOS data table at 0:48Fh for bit 0 (change
line for diskette A:) or bit 4 (change line for diskette B:). If
those bits are off, diskette A: or diskette B: will not be cached.
That is an interesting
It's not impossible to cache floppies, Jack. You just need to do it
differently than you're doing now ...
Back in 1980, I told an old friend of mine about a 750K video-driver
package which I had seen (written in C, of course!), and he noted,
They've got GUTS, calling that a DRIVER!
If I had
On Wed, 23 May 2012 09:22:03 Jack ...@earthlink.net wrote :
Subject: Re: [Freedos-user] Virtual floppy change problem
You are WRONG, Tom!!
Is he ? or are you being RUDE, Jack ?
UIDE has NEVER ignored if a diskette has change-line support! It
does in fact check the BIOS data table at 0
You are WRONG, Tom!!
Is he ? or are you being RUDE, Jack?
Tom could have written me privately, before publicly saying UIDE
assumes change-line support, but did not. I responded in kind!
Not Tom, but I'd like to learn from /what exact source/ you got the
definition for those bits.
My
Jack, PLEASE, don't pull yourself up on the VirtualBox issue, it is
rather a more general problem.
You simply rely on the contents of the memory region rather than than
properly query system via INT13. And that isn't adding much to the
logic and overall size of your drivers compared to the
Eric,
Apologies, I misread my own source file (early!) this morning. UIDE
and UIDE2 check 0:48Fh (not 448h) for the bits that indicate if drive
A: or B: suipport a media-change line. Note the BIOS data lists at:
http://www.bioscentral.com/misc/bda.htm
This document states that bit 0
Given how UIDE/UIDE2's diskette I-O has never been a problem BUT
for VirtualBox, I will keep UIDE/UIDE2 as-is.
this is going nowhere. Jack is right and everybody else is a bloody
idiot.
AMEN
Tom
--
Live Security
At 12:31 PM 5/23/2012, Jack wrote:
As I just got through noting, in another post, why would the BIOS
data include diskette change-line flags if they were NOT intended
to be USED??
Until someone can positively REFUTE the data offered by the BIOS
Central data-table list, my opinion is that neither
As I just got through noting, in another post, why would the BIOS
data include diskette change-line flags if they were NOT intended
to be USED??
Until someone can positively REFUTE the data offered by the BIOS
Central data-table list, my opinion is that neither you nor any-
one else can say
On Wed, 23 May 2012 14:33:00 -0400, Jack gykazequ...@earthlink.net wrote:
Back in 1980, I told an old friend of mine about a 750K video-driver
package which I had seen (written in C, of course!), and he noted,
They've got GUTS, calling that a DRIVER!
Wow, that sounds familiar. Was your
Hi,
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Jack gykazequ...@earthlink.net wrote:
VBox lets you choose how much % of processor to use, so it doesn't
have to use 100% all the time. I just wonder whether their bugs are
due to their tweaked BIOS or some hidden instruction incompatibility
or what.
Eric,
How does DOS ever detect that any hardware is unreliable??
I do not know, but earlier in this thread, somebody said that
the numbering of FAT filesystem exists, among other reasons,
to help DOS detect floppy changes even if there is no change
line available.
The FAT file system is
Eric,
Do try to understand, as my damn ex-wife never did [part of
why she BECAME my ex- 32 years ago!!], that I have a REASON
for everything I say and do, same as for everything in UIDE
Just making suggestions for universally faster and
more fool-proof UIDE, as I dislike the idea that
Op 22-5-2012 6:21, Rugxulo schreef:
Is anybody working on FD 1.2? I haven't heard anything (and don't
think we need it just yet anyways). Switching things around is, I
guess, that person's ultimate decision (Bernd??).
I'm indeed working on a FreeDOS 1.2 as 1.0 and 1.1 didn't meet up to my
Op 22-5-2012 16:05, Jack schreef:
PCI V2.0C and later versions have all worked just FINE, until
the rather poor emulator know as VirtualBox appeared, using
its MISERABLE emulation logic for the Intel PIIX3 chipset!!
If they DO NOT have such long delay trouble with their ICH9
emulation logic,
Jack:
The FAT file system is defined by DOS, and I want UIDE/UIDE2 to
have NO run-time dependencies on the DOS system.
Nice in theory, but unfortunately doesn't work in practice.
DOS's management of the change line is under the sole auspices of the block
device driver, not hardware/BIOS (INT
The FAT file system is defined by DOS, and I want UIDE/UIDE2 to
have NO run-time dependencies on the DOS system.
Nice in theory, but unfortunately doesn't work in practice.
Sure seems to, since before this thread, UIDE/UIDE2 have trapped only
BIOS Int 13h I-O requests, and no one has ever
Reply to Ralf A. Quint (2012-05-21 00:45)
Bertho Grandpied wrote:
Raises the question of what a Ramdisk should do in order to
properly identify itself to smartdrv... impersonate MS-RAMDRIVE, maybe ;=)
For starters, use a media descriptor byte value of 0xFA in the BPB...
This may be a good
Eric,
When DOS detects an unreliable floppy change line hardware,
it should use the floppy label / serial / similar to detect
changes in software ...
How does DOS ever detect that any hardware is unreliable??
I agree that it is nice to disable floppy caches, but maybe
the kernel actually
-- UIDE2 has only 16 spare bytes before it goes back over a 7K
.SYS file! But, I shall find a way!
I've never looked at UIDE closely, but there's always room for space
improvement in assembly!! ;-)
Maybe you should look again at the UIDE.ASM source file! I have
boiled down its logic
Dear STF,
I have tried both. No difference.
Wo
How did you change the floppy? I mean, did you just choose one
image file after another? Or did you *remove* the current floppy
image *and then* choose the next one?
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
Bertho,
Given the high level of responsibility [Ha-Ha!] taken by the
VirtualBox creators, it looks as if I will have to add another
UIDE switch, that disables diskette caching regardless of what
its other switches tell it to do.
Jack, if I may chime in... I think you're now contemplating
Hi,
On May 20, 2012 12:00 PM, Ralf A. Quint free...@gmx.net wrote
Anyway you slice it, that Virtual Box (and probably a few other VMs)
are not properly supporting this is rather due to the ignorance of
those VM developers and the stupid attitude of nobody is using
floppy disks anymore. It is
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Rugxulo rugx...@gmail.com wrote:
On May 20, 2012 12:00 PM, Ralf A. Quint free...@gmx.net wrote
Anyway you slice it, that Virtual Box (and probably a few other VMs)
are not properly supporting this is rather due to the ignorance of
those VM developers and the
Bertho,
... I've not been defending MS smartdrive against UIDE - clearly
they are not reciprocally substitutable, there are arguments for and
against, either side, and also cases when it is not easy to choose.
I've been mentioning smartdrive only for the fact that it lets the
user
Am 20.05.2012 um 20:15 schrieb dmccunney:
The number of people who still run DOS is a vanishingly small fraction
of the number of people who use computers. The number who run DOS in
a virtual machine is a small fraction of that number. The number of
people trying to run FreeDOS under
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Ulrich Hansen uhan...@mainz-online.de wrote:
Am 20.05.2012 um 20:15 schrieb dmccunney:
The number of people who still run DOS is a vanishingly small fraction
of the number of people who use computers. The number who run DOS in
a virtual machine is a small
--- En date de : Dim 20.5.12, freedos-user-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
freedos-user-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net a écrit :
De: freedos-user-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
freedos-user-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
Objet: Freedos-user Digest, Vol 636, Issue 2
À:
Op 20-5-2012 22:40, dmccunney schreef:
So how many people *are* trying to run FreeDOS under Virtual Box?
Page views != unique users.
No idea, the guide acts as a very nice general installation manual.
Combine that with the presence of multiple emulators (QEMU, Bochs,
VMware) as well as some
At 02:45 PM 5/20/2012, Bertho Grandpied wrote:
Case in point : unless explicitly excluded, MS-not-so-Smart-Drive
will happily cache certain RAMdisks (not MS ramdrive) which is
counter-productive to say the least. This is very arguably a defect
of smartdrive, which I don't expect UIDE can
Am 20.05.2012 um 22:40 schrieb dmccunney:
Am 20.05.2012 um 20:15 schrieb dmccunney:
The number of
people trying to run FreeDOS under Virtual Box can probably be counted
on the fingers of two hands with change left over.
I never said they weren't. I said very *few* were. It may well be
Ulrich,
It's great that you added the /N5 switch for VirtualBox users. It was a
really fast reaction. And the anger to be forced by a buggy program to
create such a workaround is completely understandable - and makes your
reaction even more worthy. THANKS!
My Thanks to you, as well!
From: Ralf A. Quint f...@gmx.net
At 02:45 PM 5/20/2012, Bertho Grandpied wrote:
Case in point : unless explicitly excluded, MS-not-so-Smart-Drive
will happily cache certain RAMdisks (not MS ramdrive)
What ramdisks would that be?
Your question is challenging my memory big time - I think it
At 05:10 PM 5/20/2012, Bertho Grandpied wrote:
From: Ralf A. Quint f...@gmx.net
At 02:45 PM 5/20/2012, Bertho Grandpied wrote:
Case in point : unless explicitly excluded, MS-not-so-Smart-Drive
will happily cache certain RAMdisks (not MS ramdrive)
What ramdisks would that be?
Your
Eric, et al:
thanks for the hint! I have commented out the line in autoexec.bat which
loads the UIDE.SYS cdrom driver. Now there is no problem accessing the
floppy images.
So maybe there is a problem with floppy change signalling
versus caches - would be interesting to know whether it is
to
(temporally) disable the UIDE driver in order to get my stuff done.
Wo
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Sat, 19 May 2012 14:46:56 -0700
Von: Jack gykazequ...@earthlink.net
An: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Betreff: Re: [Freedos-user] Virtual floppy change problem
thanks for the hint! I have commented out the line in autoexec.bat which
loads the UIDE.SYS cdrom driver. Now there is no problem accessing the
floppy images.
So maybe there is a problem with floppy change signalling
versus caches - would be interesting to know whether it is
sufficient
Wolfgang,
I am so happy that there is something like FreeDos available, even for
free, that I can play around with. As I usually pretty soon run into
very strange challenges for (any) software - some people say, that every
computer that sees me for the first time, simply crashes,
Jack,
I don't think that this is possible. In my case, the installation prgrams is
asking for the disks one by one, so there is no way to issue a commandline
command inbetween.
Wolfgang
--
NEU: FreePhone 3-fach-Flat mit kostenlosem Smartphone!
Jetzt
Jack,
when your harddrive as well as your floppies are virtual: does it make sense to
cache them at all? The host operating system probably is already caching the
relevant data.
Wolfgang
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro!
Wolfgang,
when your harddrive as well as your floppies are virtual: does
it make sense to cache them at all? The host operating system
probably is already caching the relevant data.
One cannot be sure the host system is caching data! You should
test this, by running with UIDE (caching)
El 16/05/2012 12:03 p.m., Wolfgang Schechinger escribió:
Dear experts,
I have some floppy images I want to use with FreeDos that is running in a VM
(VirtualBox). The images work fine with e.g. Windows in such an environment.
However with the virtual FreeDos, disk changes are not
-Nachricht
Datum: Wed, 16 May 2012 13:27:59 -0430
Von: Marco Achury marcoach...@gmail.com
An: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Betreff: Re: [Freedos-user] Virtual floppy change problem with VirtualBox
El 16/05/2012 12:03 p.m., Wolfgang Schechinger escribió:
Dear experts,
I have
Hi Wolfgang,
I just tested this with FreeDOS 1.1 as guest and VirtualBox 4.1.14 under OS X
as host and it works for me.
I start FreeDOS with option 1 in the start menu.
I did not load UIDE.SYS in AUTOEXEC.BAT, as I normally don't work with CDs in
FreeDOS anyway and VirtualBox conflicts with
Hi Ulrich,
thanks for the hint! I have commented out the line in autoexec.bat which loads
the UIDE.SYS cdrom driver. Now there is no problem accessing the floppy images.
Best regards,
Wo
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro!
Wolfgang and Ulrich,
Hi Ulrich,
thanks for the hint! I have commented out the line in autoexec.bat
which loads the UIDE.SYS cdrom driver. Now there is no problem
accessing the floppy images.
This sounds to me as if VirtualBox is NOT posting the media change
bits for a floppy-disk in
55 matches
Mail list logo
