From owner-freebsd-emulation Tue Sep 24 20:13:40 1996 Return-Path: owner-emulation Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA24515 for emulation-outgoing; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 20:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from haus.efn.org ([198.68.17.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA24464 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 20:13:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from garcia.efn.org (j_mini@garcia.efn.org [198.68.17.5]) by haus.efn.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA12559; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 20:16:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (j_mini@localhost) by garcia.efn.org (8.7.4/8.7.2) with SMTP id UAA24520; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 20:13:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Authentication-Warning: garcia.efn.org: j_mini owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 20:13:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Jonathan Mini To: Michael Smith cc: emulation@freebsd.org, prb@bsdi.com Subject: Re: New DOScmd snapshot available In-Reply-To: <199609250308.MAA07157@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-emulation@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 25 Sep 1996, Michael Smith wrote: > Jonathan Mini stands accused of saying: > > > > > If you're a DOS expert with some time and experience to spare, a > > > critical eye over the memory and exec routines would be very helpful. > > > I do not profess to understand these, and I suspect that there may be > > > some lurking problems. > > > > Well, that's what *I'm* here for.... > > And grateful I am about it 8) So where are your rude comments? 8) 8) 8) Hey...hey... I make them so nicely you don't notice. ;) At least let me d/l the code first! Jeeeze. And I sort of have this school thing... pesky I know, but.... > > Ummmm... Guys? Running MSD and/or Norton SysInfo will probably be > > impossible for the end of all time.. the reason behind this is that Norton > > SysInfo messes with a few hardware interrupts and/or ports that change > > system timings so that it can get accurate benchmarks. (In fact, in the > > case of Norton Sysinfo, I beleive it sets the PIC timers to what FreeBSD > > uses for it's profiler, although I couldn't swear on it.) > > We don't let DOS programs touch the hardware. The aim is to emulate it > well enough that these programs will run, even if they produce bogus > results. The fact that they fail completely at the moment is clear > evidence that we're not doing well enough yet. I understand this... the thing is is that it's hard to trap everything "important" without trapping everything. If you see what I mean... .... That is "trapping" is no big deal. That's the whole POINT behind v86 tasks. What is hard is simulating the hrdware you're trapping. If you get good enough IRQ-emulating code working to make programs such as Norton sysInfo work, I'll be impressed. (That should put you about > < that close to being able to run a REAL MS version of windows in doscmd. Perhaps only "standard mode" but still.) > > Jon Mini, j_mini@efn.org, mini@4j.lane.edu > ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au [[ Jon Mini, j_mini@efn.org, mini@4j.lane.edu GAMMA Development Team -------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can...." little.blue.engine:Reality Protection Fault. (core dumped) --------------------------------------------------------------------------