> Sort of.  It's perfectly possible to start Linux from DOS --
that's exactly
> what LOADLIN does (load kernel image into memory, jump to the
entry point --
> the 'kernel' entry point is usually the top of a decompression
routine which
> unpacks the kernel itself and jumps to the true entry point,
which starts
> the OS), and is also how NetWare works.  NetWare is kinda
unique in that it
> doesn't overwrite DOS unless told to -- unless one issues the
REMOVE DOS
> command at the System Console, one can DOWN the server and EXIT
back to DOS.
> That's probably because NetWare 2 used to be able to run in
either dedicated
> or non-dedicated (the machine still works as a DOS machine)
mode.

Yes. Thanks. A couple other people pointed out these programs to
me yesterday. Obviously, they work beyond the scope of my current
position on the learning curve. (no surprise, there<g>) I think I
will continue on my current plodding course, learning how one
operating system actually 'does its stuff' before I try tackling
these more advanced topics, but at least I now know of their
existence. I am still working on understanding the difference
between the flat model and segmented model of addressing memory
in the x86 processor. Heh.

> The main problem with running multiple operating systems at the
same time is
> simply design -- an OS is designed, through necessity, with the
assumption
> that it will be the only OS in use and so has full control of
the machine's
> resources.  To get to a point where two OSes can run on the
same machine, a
> virtualisation technique must be employed.  IBM mainframes have
been doing
> this for decades, and on the PC we have VMware (an excellent
piece of
> software) and plex86 (LGPLed VMware-type project, has a lot of
potential but
> right now also needs a lot of work).  DOSemu fits into that
category too.
> We also have emulators like bochs (LGPLed x86 emulator on lots
of
> platforms -- it runs on x8 Unix, Win32, Solaris on Sun
hardware, etc.) and
> Wine or WABI (Windows applications run under Unix with
emulation of the
> APIs), which are slower than virtualisation techniques but
still very
> useful.  And then there are things like User-mode Linux, which
will boot a
> Linux kernel as a Linux application.  I'm not sure how that
works -- I think
> it's VM-based.

I did know about 'Wine', and emulators, but those, as I
understand it, are not operating systems, but just programs that
provide an interface layer between the non-OS programs, and the
OS, to direct I/O and resource allocations properly.

> For those of us with powerful enough machine, VMware is an
ideal solution to
> running multiple OSes -- I often have a NetWare server or two
plus a couple
> of Linux machines running while I'm working in Windows on this
machine.  It
> does require quite a bit of grunt to make work though -- I've
got dual
> 800MHz processors in this box, and seriously fast RAM.

My most powerful machine is no-where near powerful enough to do
this; a single PIII processor, 128MB RAM. My older 386 and 486
boxes are amazingly slower and smaller, in every respect (except
for the physical boxes themselves<g>)

For what I am doing now, these are probably going to be more than
sufficient for the next several years. Most of the programs I
write now are student level, and not very resource hungry, and
online activities seem to have hit a 56K ceiling for the time
being, since modem communications are still the only connection
available to the vast majority of users, and anything I post to
my website is designed with those viewers in mind.

Thanks for the info! This is one the most informative lists I
subscribe to.

 -wittig http://www.robertwittig.com/
"Never hold a dustbuster and a cat at the same time."
 -Kyoyo, age 11

To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
More info can be found at;
http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html

Reply via email to