CM's questions, answered (Miscellaneous)
> Read again, Mister. The DOS7 method won't work in DOS 8, and vice versa.
> DOS8 CS=FFFF is hardcoded, it's how they built it.
Okay.
> MS-DOS 8 is intended as
> a launcher for Windows ME, not as a compatible all purpose DOS.
It still contains lots of stuff not required just for launching Windows.
> (which also makes DOS8 marginally faster than its predecessor).
You probably won't notice on 586+ machines.
> if like me you don't own ME,
I do own it.
> >(Might be due to unknown A20 switch
> > method, or only 1 MiB of physical memory.
>
> DOS couldn't load. In the better case they'll output a cryptic message
> (you must reinstall Windows ME ???), or, as we know Microsoft, might
> simply crash. I don't know which, care to check ? Use an emulator and
> somehow break the HMA...
I don't care, really. They probably crash, just as they don't check for a 386+ CPU.
> And ME wasn't supposed to run on a 386. I believe it's "Pentium or better"
> (Win 95 : 386+, 98: 486DX IIRW).
Windows 4 certainly won't run well on a 386 PC but MS-DOS 7/8 alone should run.
> Not that I am a regular user of Win-ME (who is ? )
I has been using it some years. It's not as bad as they say; especially the native USB support was a lot better than 98 SE's. (I.e. it was actually usable.)
> >> - Case DOS 7.x : peek into DOSData, there is
>
> > Where? Or rather: How do you find that table? If I'd want to find it
> now,
> > I'd look at the interrupt vector for one of the unaltered interrupts in
> my
> > debugger. Your way might be able to find the table even with all these
> > interrupts hooked.
>
> Yes of course it is and is the reason I choose this way.
Umm, I asked where/how you find that table in the DOS data segment.
> I like to get an idea of who requests the code, how many samples, their
> expectations, and possibly get some feedback.
I don't think anyone will get in contact with you only because he "has to" ask you for the source. Rather I find it inconvenient to request it, because it does take more actual effort by me and I'll have to wait until you react to it.
> Do you think an informal
> email request is too much to ask of them ?
No, as I stated previously.
> It's not like I'm concealing trade secrets, on the contrary, I am set up
> to explain clearly the hows and whys, namely in answers to this forum, in
> a manner which I think for most people makes more sense than an assembly
> listing.
These people could go on and read your answers here instead of reading the provided source. I don't see how you, providing the source as download, would prevent them from doing so or you from writing these answers.
Complete thread:
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - Ninho, 11.12.2009, 00:17 (Miscellaneous)
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - ecm, 11.12.2009, 15:02
- new *FIXWRAP* for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - Ninho, 12.12.2009, 01:12
- FIXWRAP technical thread. News - Ninho, 12.12.2009, 16:05
- CM's questions, answered - Ninho, 12.12.2009, 18:22
- CM's questions, answered - ecm, 12.12.2009, 22:40
- CM's questions, answered - Ninho, 13.12.2009, 00:10
- CM's questions, answered - ecm, 13.12.2009, 00:51
- CM's questions, answered - Ninho, 13.12.2009, 10:32
- CM's questions, answered - ecm, 13.12.2009, 00:51
- CM's questions, answered - Ninho, 13.12.2009, 00:10
- CM's questions, answered - geoffchappell, 14.12.2009, 10:42
- CM's questions, answered - Ninho, 14.12.2009, 12:19
- CM's questions, answered - ecm, 12.12.2009, 22:40
- CM's questions, answered - Ninho, 12.12.2009, 18:22
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - geoffchappell, 14.12.2009, 10:41
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - Ninho, 14.12.2009, 11:49
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - geoffchappell, 15.12.2009, 16:55
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - Ninho, 15.12.2009, 19:08
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - Ninho, 17.12.2009, 16:35
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - geoffchappell, 15.12.2009, 16:55
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - Ninho, 14.12.2009, 11:49
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - Ninho, 14.12.2009, 20:37
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - ecm, 14.12.2009, 23:30
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - Ninho, 15.12.2009, 00:59
- Aha! Share was a *red herring* ! Hunt over !!! - Ninho, 15.12.2009, 10:32
- Aha! Share was a *red herring* ! Hunt over !!! - ecm, 15.12.2009, 21:13
- Aha! Share was a *red herring* ! Hunt over !!! - Ninho, 15.12.2009, 22:32
- Aha! Share was a *red herring* ! Hunt over !!! - ecm, 15.12.2009, 23:05
- Aha! Share was a *red herring* ! Hunt over !!! - Ninho, 15.12.2009, 22:32
- Aha! Share was a *red herring* ! Hunt over !!! - ecm, 15.12.2009, 21:13
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - geoffchappell, 15.12.2009, 16:56
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - ecm, 15.12.2009, 21:19
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - Ninho, 15.12.2009, 22:38
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - ecm, 15.12.2009, 23:06
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - Ninho, 16.12.2009, 09:22
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - ecm, 15.12.2009, 23:06
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - Ninho, 15.12.2009, 22:38
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - Ninho, 16.12.2009, 20:24
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - Ninho, 30.12.2009, 10:50
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - ecm, 15.12.2009, 21:19
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - Ninho, 16.12.2009, 19:51
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - ecm, 17.12.2009, 16:19
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - Ninho, 17.12.2009, 17:14
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - ecm, 17.12.2009, 20:32
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - Ninho, 17.12.2009, 21:05
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - ecm, 17.12.2009, 21:13
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - Ninho, 17.12.2009, 23:16
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - Ninho, 18.12.2009, 13:04
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - ecm, 18.12.2009, 14:31
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - Ninho, 18.12.2009, 17:19
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - ecm, 18.12.2009, 18:19
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - Ninho, 18.12.2009, 18:55
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - ecm, 18.12.2009, 18:19
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - Ninho, 18.12.2009, 17:19
- digression : MSDOS 7 and SHARE.EXE revisited - ecm, 18.12.2009, 14:31
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - ecm, 17.12.2009, 21:13
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - Ninho, 17.12.2009, 21:05
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - ecm, 17.12.2009, 20:32
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - Ninho, 17.12.2009, 17:14
- the algorithm, sketched for review. Nitpicks ? - ecm, 17.12.2009, 16:19
- the DOS code segment hunt, results/questions - ecm, 14.12.2009, 23:30
- HACKWRAP.SYS news, testing - Ninho, 20.12.2009, 02:44
- FIXWRAP.SYS 0.5 beta - released - please try it ! - Ninho, 23.12.2009, 00:07
- new HACKWRAP fix for MS-DOS7+, aka smashing the bug - ecm, 11.12.2009, 15:02