| CandyMan 21.07.2023, 15:40 |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 (Announce) |
I released new versions DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 Files with the "org" extension are uncompressed, while the others are. Here are some changes: Does not scan LBA drives when dx<80h, For unsupported functions, 71xx returns ax=7100h again, Handling interrupts 0x00 and 0x06 (division by zero and invalid opcode) as in FreeDos. You can download it from here: https://megawrzuta.pl/download/252a1cd7d21a0187e9e04a5fbc4dbc86.html nico7550 can you test this version? |
| glennmcc North Jackson, Ohio (USA), 21.07.2023, 20:13 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> I released new versions DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 > > Files with the "org" extension are uncompressed, while the others are. > Fantastic ! I did not know that anyone was working on new versions. Question: Do either of them have 'native' FAT32 support and/or 'native' LFN support ? --- |
| nico7550 21.07.2023, 20:27 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Hi, for sure I love to see new version of old kernel, so it's based on EDR-DOS 7.01.08 WIP ? What kind of tests do you need ? I'm finishing to integrate Paragon DOS 7.01 in my bootdisk and I will take a look at it. |
| fritz.mueller Munich, Germany, 21.07.2023, 20:29 @ nico7550 |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Hi,
ehhmmm, where to click to download it? |
| glennmcc North Jackson, Ohio (USA), 21.07.2023, 20:34 @ fritz.mueller |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> Hi,
> ehhmmm, where to click to download it? --- |
| CandyMan 21.07.2023, 22:18 @ nico7550 |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> What kind of tests do you need ? Booting on real hardware with multiple drives. It would be useful to test individual system functions (checking the operation of interrupts - 21h, 2Fh etc.) in order to detect bugs. |
| nico7550 21.07.2023, 22:45 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> > What kind of tests do you need ? > > Booting on real hardware with multiple drives. It would be useful to test > individual system functions (checking the operation of interrupts - 21h, > 2Fh etc.) in order to detect bugs. Sadly, I give old my old computers to a local computer club in order to make room in the house. I'm using 86Box for some years and I'm relly happy with it. |
| nico7550 22.07.2023, 09:40 @ nico7550 |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
But I will test it for sure. Can you give some info about the compression process (did you remove the loader at the begining of the file to turn it into an exe, patch it a lot, compress it and reinject the loader to turn it back to sys as Mercury127 did with his IOPACK suite of tools based on aPACK) ? |
| CandyMan 22.07.2023, 23:06 @ nico7550 |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> But I will test it for sure. Can you give some info about the compression > process (did you remove the loader at the begining of the file to turn it > into an exe, patch it a lot, compress it and reinject the loader to turn it > back to sys as Mercury127 did with his IOPACK suite of tools based on > aPACK) ? Not exactly, but I used the aPACK and UPX programs for the BIOS and DOS parts respectively and some tricks. |
| Guti 24.07.2023, 11:08 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Love you are bringing back the EDR-DOS project! > I released new versions DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 > > Files with the "org" extension are uncompressed, while the others are. > > Here are some changes: > > Does not scan LBA drives when dx<80h, > For unsupported functions, 71xx returns ax=7100h again, > Handling interrupts 0x00 and 0x06 (division by zero and invalid opcode) as > in FreeDos. > > You can download it from here: > https://megawrzuta.pl/download/252a1cd7d21a0187e9e04a5fbc4dbc86.html > > nico7550 can you test this version? --- |
| CandyMan 25.07.2023, 15:04 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Here is another improved version of EDR-DOS. Now the interrupt vectors saved at startup are again at the fixed address 0070h:0100h. There is also MS.COM (Memory Statistics) at the request of nico7550. https://megawrzuta.pl/download/e7c2a5ace1d02143ea0c64ac15b49135.html |
| nico7550 26.07.2023, 15:19 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> Here is another improved version of EDR-DOS. Now the interrupt vectors > saved at startup are again at the fixed address 0070h:0100h. > > There is also MS.COM (Memory Statistics) at the request of nico7550. > > https://megawrzuta.pl/download/e7c2a5ace1d02143ea0c64ac15b49135.html Hi, Thanks for this update Should the behaviour be different when using the compressed ot the uncompressed version ? Why working on .7 instead of only .8 ? Thanks for the MS tools it's great, small and a lot of info, can I ask one thing please: can the default scren be the summary screen (last screen) and a switch to have the details screen instead of all screen at once ? (you can also take a look to the memory tools source by Japheth (EMSSTAT, XMSSTAT and MEMSTAT) if you want to add more stuff ? Maybe produce a lightweigh version also ? With only a summary scren) Anyway great I will use MS now. |
| Guti 30.07.2023, 11:12 @ nico7550 |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> Why working on .7 instead of only .8 ? I am curious too. --- |
| DieTotenByte 30.07.2023, 01:09 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Hi CandyMan. Can you upload the sourcecode or some diff? I have been messing around DRDos source, mostly to add a few options to make the booting process and command com less verbose, and I'd love to see what you did. |
| CandyMan 30.07.2023, 10:55 @ DieTotenByte |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> Hi CandyMan. Can you upload the sourcecode or some diff? > I have been messing around DRDos source, mostly to add a few options to > make the booting process and command com less verbose, and I'd love to see > what you did. Here is the source code: https://megawrzuta.pl/download/cbef417c0f85eeaed244828d5915c6e5.html |
| CandyMan 03.08.2023, 21:46 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Today I added the INT21.AX33FF.DX0000 function as in RxDOS and FreeeDOS. I also removed exception handling 0x6 due to some BIOSes using invalid CPU instructions prefixed with 0xF0 (LOCK) generating this exception. New kernel files are here: https://megawrzuta.pl/download/61b85729a033da2c534aab878da404c0.html |
| CandyMan 10.08.2023, 11:09 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Here is my final version of EDR-DOS 7.01.8 for now, checked by nico7550. https://megawrzuta.pl/download/52f9590ae302e4d20b693e7e1b79ca72.html |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 10.08.2023, 15:52 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> Here is my final version of EDR-DOS 7.01.8 for now, checked by nico7550. > > https://megawrzuta.pl/download/52f9590ae302e4d20b693e7e1b79ca72.html The older latest EDR-DOS had a bug when 64-bit seek (int 21h function 7142h) was called on redirector handles. DOS should either return an error then, or try to pass it to the dosemu2 extension service int 2Fh function 11C2h/1142h (as my seekext TSR does). Perhaps you can include a fix to that? --- |
| CandyMan 10.08.2023, 19:21 @ ecm |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> The older latest EDR-DOS had a bug when 64-bit seek (int 21h function > 7142h) was called on redirector handles. DOS should either return an error > then, or try to pass it to the dosemu2 extension service int 2Fh function > 11C2h/1142h (as > my > seekext TSR does). Perhaps you can include a fix to that? Maybe we can fix this bug together. I don't want to spoil what I have. |
| CandyMan 11.08.2023, 10:47 (edited by CandyMan, 13.08.2023, 23:54) @ ecm |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Is what I changed enough? Should I add anything else? |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 12.08.2023, 21:13 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
> Is what I changed enough? Should I add anything else?
The problem is the calls to --- |
| CandyMan 13.08.2023, 11:16 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
I don't think I can make these changes alone. I'm not that familiar with the DOS kernel. |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 13.08.2023, 13:59 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
> I don't think I can make these changes alone. I'm not that familiar with > the DOS kernel. I can prepare a patch later. I tested MSWindows 95 (on pcjs) and a device handle works a little differently than on EDR-DOS: * Function 42h allows to seek anywhere, as if the device is a file of length zero. * Function 71A6h returns with CY set (even if input was NC, that is not "CF unchanged"), AX=7100h. --- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 13.08.2023, 14:39 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
> > I don't think I can make these changes alone. I'm not that familiar with > > the DOS kernel. > > I can prepare a patch later. > > I tested MSWindows 95 (on pcjs) and a device handle works a little > differently than on EDR-DOS: > > * Function 42h allows to seek anywhere, as if the device is a file of > length zero. > > * Function 71A6h returns with CY set (even if input was NC, that is not "CF > unchanged"), AX=7100h. Running function 71A6h on a file on a redirector file system (Phantom 3.0) MSW 95 also appears to return CY, AX=7100h. --- |
| CandyMan 13.08.2023, 19:23 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
> > I can prepare a patch later. > Thanks for your commitment and help. PS: I noticed that you are also working on the RxDOS kernel. Is it stable? |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 13.08.2023, 21:41 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
> > > > I can prepare a patch later. > > > > Thanks for your commitment and help. I took the opportunity to create an EDR-DOS repo on our server, at https://hg.pushbx.org/ecm/edrdos (I interpret the new CP/M and derivatives license agreement as of 2022-07-07 as including EDR-DOS, so it should be fine to host it. This license agreement is in the file license.htm in the repo's root directory.) I added one patch to COMMAND that was needed to build with OpenWatcom 1.9 (from a DOS host system, running in dosemu2) fixing a bug. I fixed the redirector support for functions 7142h and 71A6h, both to support the dosemu2 extensions and to never crash on a redirector handle. (If the extensions are not supported, 7142h returns an error code of CY, ax=0001h and 71A6h an error code of CY, ax=7100h (like MSWindows).) Further, I modified both the old-style function 42h and 7142h to work on device handles in the same way as MSWindows, allowing to seek as if the device was an empty file. I also changed it so function 71A6h returns CY, ax=7100h on a device handle. > PS: I noticed that you are also working on the RxDOS kernel. Is it stable? No, far from it. And I'm not technically working on it currently. Haven't in a long time. You can view the current state in the repo: https://hg.pushbx.org/ecm/rxdos-7.2x/ I prefer contributing to the FreeDOS kernel now. I also use it for most of my developments (primarily the lDebug debugger). --- |
| CandyMan 13.08.2023, 22:41 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
Thanks for making these changes. My most important fix is the one below (last two lines posted - in "disk.asm"). Without it, the system freezes on my computer with grub4dos.
|
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 13.08.2023, 23:18 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
> Thanks for making these changes. My most important fix is the one below > (last two lines posted - in "disk.asm"). Without it, the system freezes on > my computer with grub4dos. If you allow it, I want to add your changes to my repo. I already downloaded the source archive you uploaded earlier: > Here is the source code: > > https://megawrzuta.pl/download/cbef417c0f85eeaed244828d5915c6e5.html Other than what you quoted here I am also interested in the other changes you mentioned: > Files with the "org" extension are uncompressed, while the others are. > > Here are some changes: > > Does not scan LBA drives when dx<80h, > For unsupported functions, 71xx returns ax=7100h again, > Handling interrupts 0x00 and 0x06 (division by zero and invalid opcode) as in FreeDos. and > Not exactly, but I used the aPACK and UPX programs for the BIOS and DOS parts respectively and some tricks. and > Here is another improved version of EDR-DOS. Now the interrupt vectors saved at startup are again at the fixed address 0070h:0100h. and > Today I added the INT21.AX33FF.DX0000 function as in RxDOS and FreeeDOS. > > I also removed exception handling 0x6 due to some BIOSes using invalid CPU instructions prefixed with 0xF0 (LOCK) generating this exception. Did you actually not use the EDR-DOS packer to compress your kernel files? https://pushbx.org/ecm/download/edrdos/pack100.zip and https://pushbx.org/ecm/download/edrdos/pack101.zip --- |
| CandyMan 13.08.2023, 23:51 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS bugs on int 21h functions 7142h and 71A6h |
> Did you actually not use the EDR-DOS packer to compress your kernel files? I used aPACK, UPX and FASM for compression. My actual code: https://megawrzuta.pl/download/535349ee2e5dbc3a2d9afc8bc2330325.html By the way, I noticed that the 714E/714F function in EDR-DOS doesn't seem to work. After running Dos Navigator 2 (DN2 for Win32) using HX dos extender only directories are visible (no files). |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 14.08.2023, 07:18 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> > Did you actually not use the EDR-DOS packer to compress your kernel > files? > > I used aPACK, UPX and FASM for compression. > > My actual code: > https://megawrzuta.pl/download/535349ee2e5dbc3a2d9afc8bc2330325.html Thanks, I will look into this later. > By the way, I noticed that the 714E/714F function in EDR-DOS doesn't seem > to work. After running Dos Navigator 2 (DN2 for Win32) using HX dos > extender only directories are visible (no files). Can you upload the exact files you're using? If I can reproduce this bug I may be able to fix it. --- |
| CandyMan 14.08.2023, 09:43 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> > By the way, I noticed that the 714E/714F function in EDR-DOS doesn't > seem > > to work. After running Dos Navigator 2 (DN2 for Win32) using HX dos > > extender only directories are visible (no files). > > Can you upload the exact files you're using? If I can reproduce this bug I > may be able to fix it. Also, the 7Z archiver started with the *.* mask only sees directories. I don't know if it's the fault of DOS or the dos extender. Below are the programs I use: https://megawrzuta.pl/download/400807cf0f611833d8248747468acd74.html |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 15.08.2023, 20:49 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> > > By the way, I noticed that the 714E/714F function in EDR-DOS doesn't > > seem > > > to work. After running Dos Navigator 2 (DN2 for Win32) using HX dos > > > extender only directories are visible (no files). > > > > Can you upload the exact files you're using? If I can reproduce this bug > I > > may be able to fix it. > > Also, the 7Z archiver started with the *.* mask only sees directories. > I don't know if it's the fault of DOS or the dos extender. > > Below are the programs I use: > https://megawrzuta.pl/download/400807cf0f611833d8248747468acd74.html Can you list the exact commands or actions that I can do to reproduce the errors, please? --- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 15.08.2023, 20:51 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> Can you list the exact commands or actions that I can do to reproduce the > errors, please? Also, I haven't used it in a long time so I'm unsure what setup (if any) the HX extender needs in order to run MSWindows programs. --- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 19.08.2023, 19:56 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> Also, the 7Z archiver started with the *.* mask only sees directories.
> I don't know if it's the fault of DOS or the dos extender.
I believe that the source of this problem, or a part of it, may be that EDR-DOS's functions 714Eh, 714Fh, and 71A1h do not really allow concurrent searches. It may require some amount of work to fix this.
What happens now is 7-Zip finds a directory, recurses into it, and tries to start a new search. After finishing processing the directory, it closes the Find handle and tries to continue the search of the original working directory. This is corrupted from the recursive search.
Another part is with --- |
| CandyMan 14.08.2023, 14:35 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
What do you think about adding to EDR-DOS and maybe to FreeDOS an extended Exec() function with variants with for example bit 6 of the AL register set (Int21.AX=4B40, Int21.AX=4B41 etc.) to run the program with the line command longer than 127 bytes? The long command line would be copied into the program environment and would be available under the name CMDLINE as the 4DOS interpreter does. It annoys me that it's so short. |
| bretjohn Rio Rancho, NM, 14.08.2023, 21:12 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> What do you think about adding to EDR-DOS and maybe to FreeDOS an extended > Exec() function with variants with for example bit 6 of the AL register set > (Int21.AX=4B40, Int21.AX=4B41 etc.) to run the program with the line > command longer than 127 bytes? The long command line would be copied into > the program environment and would be available under the name CMDLINE as > the 4DOS interpreter does. It annoys me that it's so short. It's unnecessary to add new DOS function(s) for this -- there's already a "standard" way to do it. Check the byte value at PSP:80h (the number of characters in the command-line string) and if it's at least 7Eh then look for a CMDLINE environment variable. If the CMDLINE variable doesn't exist then 7Eh is the actual size of the command-line string. Just as a cautionary note, you shouldn't just automatically look for a CMDLINE environment variable since the user can set that environment variable called CMDLINE to anything they want that has nothing to do with the command-line. You should only use it if the value at PSP:80h is >= 7Eh. BTW this also works in at least some versions of the Windows command-line shell. |
| CandyMan 15.08.2023, 11:49 @ bretjohn |
EDR-DOS development |
Thanks for the exhaustive explanation. Who asks not stray. |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 15.08.2023, 20:46 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> > Did you actually not use the EDR-DOS packer to compress your kernel > files? > > I used aPACK, UPX and FASM for compression. Do you want to share scripts or descriptions for this too? Your latest sources only seem to add the load-fix.inc file as a part that seems related to compression. > My actual code: > https://megawrzuta.pl/download/535349ee2e5dbc3a2d9afc8bc2330325.html I have some questions: Why do you want to clear only 12h bytes at 0:500h rather than 20h bytes? Can you describe the failure without your disk.asm change not to do something with diskette units? Why did you change the colour offset? It seems like 24, 25, 26 points after the CON device header and its "COLOUR" signature while you subtract 6. So it actually uses the signature as data. I don't think unsupported subfunctions of a partially supported int 21h service 71h function should return 7100h. Both FreeDOS and RxDOS do not check for DX being zero for function 33FFh. I did call it like that in callver as well as in comcom32 but that is just to harden the check on whether it is supported. Finally, what name (if any) do you want me to enter into the repository for changes I pick from your patches? --- |
| CandyMan 15.08.2023, 22:29 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
>1. Why do you want to clear only 12h bytes at 0:500h rather than 20h bytes? >2. Can you describe the failure without your disk.asm change not to do something with diskette units? >3. Why did you change the colour offset? It seems like 24, 25, 26 points after the CON device header and its "COLOUR" signature while you subtract 6. So it actually uses the signature as data. >4. I don't think unsupported subfunctions of a partially supported int 21h service 71h function should return 7100h. >5. Finally, what name (if any) do you want me to enter into the repository for changes I pick from your patches? >6. Also, I haven't used it in a long time so I'm unsure what setup (if any) the HX extender needs in order to run MSWindows programs. >7. Can you list the exact commands or actions that I can do to reproduce the errors, please? 1. I did it for my own use. On my boot disk, I use a different kernel loader and store interrupt vectors 13h and 15h Linux/GRUB4DOS at address 0:0512 for later transfer to UMB memory and back after Int19h. Data at this address was probably used only by GWBasic. 2. I don't remember now, it was 3 years ago. I'm using a little Linux and GRUB4DOS to run DOS because I don't have a floppy drive anymore. The disk drive is emulated and is somewhere in memory above 1MB. Without this fix, it just freezes. 3. I did it so that the DOS interrupts were stored at a fixed address 0070h:0100h 4. Some programs (7zip launched with the command to unpack the archive using HX-DOS) only understand the code 7100h. When the code 0001h is returned, they assume that the file/directory cannot be created and abort without executing short file name function (39h). 5. You can use any name (e.g. CandyMan fix). 6. HX configuration: any XMS driver and C:\HX\BIN in the PATH environment variable and running HXLDR32.EXE resident 7. Programs to reproduce the error: just run DN.EXE or 7Z a -mx Archive.7Z *.* The way it compresses the kernel: https://megawrzuta.pl/download/c3100b23f1dc691db9e9e9b693d256d4.html |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 16.08.2023, 10:06 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> >1. Why do you want to clear only 12h bytes at 0:500h rather than 20h
> bytes?
>
> >2. Can you describe the failure without your disk.asm change not to do
> something with diskette units?
>
> >3. Why did you change the colour offset? It seems like 24, 25, 26 points
> after the CON device header and its "COLOUR" signature while you subtract
> 6. So it actually uses the signature as data.
>
> >4. I don't think unsupported subfunctions of a partially supported int 21h
> service 71h function should return 7100h.
>
> >5. Finally, what name (if any) do you want me to enter into the repository
> for changes I pick from your patches?
>
> >6. Also, I haven't used it in a long time so I'm unsure what setup (if
> any) the HX extender needs in order to run MSWindows programs.
>
> >7. Can you list the exact commands or actions that I can do to reproduce
> the errors, please?
>
> 1. I did it for my own use. On my boot disk, I use a different kernel
> loader and store interrupt vectors 13h and 15h Linux/GRUB4DOS at address
> 0:0512 for later transfer to UMB memory and back after Int19h. Data at this
> address was probably used only by GWBasic.
Okay, I can do that. I don't think this patch will do any harm.
> 2. I don't remember now, it was 3 years ago. I'm using a little Linux and
> GRUB4DOS to run DOS because I don't have a floppy drive anymore. The disk
> drive is emulated and is somewhere in memory above 1MB. Without this fix,
> it just freezes.
All right.
> 3. I did it so that the DOS interrupts were stored at a fixed address
> 0070h:0100h
Oh, I missed that you also commented out the --- |
| CandyMan 16.08.2023, 12:54 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> Interesting, thanks! I do have some comments:
>
> Can you describe fix-bio's use of virtual and load dword / store dword? I
> am not used to FASM specific directives. The load and store access and
> change data that is already assembled? file is like NASM incbin? virtual
> assembles into a space that is discarded afterwards, just for access with
> load?
>
> The registers don't all need to be preserved by fix-bio. es, di, si, bx,
> and cx are probably not used by the EDR-DOS load protocol. dl, ds, bp, ss,
> sp may be used.
>
> I don't like the use of the memory at 004F0h for saving the registers. It
> would be better to use the stack or at least 005F0h.
>
> The fix-bio expects the compressed file to be < 64 KiB. Fair enough.
>
> The |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 16.08.2023, 18:19 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
You didn't reply about the int 71h function error codes. Apart from the compression support and the colour signature removal, this is the only patch of yours I didn't add to my repo yet.
> In fix-bio.asm I add a small procedure at the end of dosbio.sys.
> In the virtual block, I set a new jump instruction for this procedure and
> then copy the previous compressed jump instruction to drbio.sys (4 bytes)
> to be able to recreate it and run the unpacking procedure to the address
> CS-10h:IP+100h
Yes, I do think 3 bytes would suffice though. A near jump instruction is 3 bytes.
> The "file" directive works exactly like the "incbin" in nasm, but you can
> also specify the start and size of the loaded file block.
Actually, NASM's incbin does have that too: https://www.nasm.us/xdoc/2.16.01/html/nasmdoc3.html#section-3.2.3 It might be a little known feature however, as I didn't know about it when I originally wrote my bootimg FATFS format script.
Unlike this, NASM really does not have fasm's load and store directives. Those are more powerful, even though 3 of your fix files' uses of them can be replaced by using incbin with various parameters. (The replacement of the last byte of the compressed drdos.com by a --- |
| CandyMan 16.08.2023, 18:55 (edited by CandyMan, 16.08.2023, 19:10) @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> You didn't reply about the int 71h function error codes. Apart from the > compression support and the colour signature removal, this is the only > patch of yours I didn't add to my repo yet. > I didn't answer because I'm not entirely sure. Perhaps it is enough for HX-DOS to understand the return code 0001h as it understands 7100h. > Is there a need for that here? Why did you use one once and the other once, > rather than twice the same? > I just forgot to change. When I run under Win64 I can't use "vasm", and when I don't have HX loaded in DOS I can't use "fasm". I now know, though not exactly, why the system freezes. After loading DRDOS.SYS (also uncompressed) it jumps to the wrong place for me and after the RET instruction to the next one. However, I don't know exactly how to fix it. The only correct solution was the amendment I proposed. I used Dark Debugger to trace the boot process. |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 20.08.2023, 01:35 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
>
> By the way, I noticed that the 714E/714F function in EDR-DOS doesn't seem
> to work. After running Dos Navigator 2 (DN2 for Win32) using HX dos
> extender only directories are visible (no files).
I was confused by your wording here, you wrote "after running DN2" but I think you meant *when* running DN2 then in the application only directories are visible.
If I am correct in that then I fixed that bug. It also affected 7-Zip which wants to get all files for a --- |
| CandyMan 21.08.2023, 00:27 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> Please test with my build that will be updated later today (in 22h from > now), at https://pushbx.org/ecm/download/old/edrdos/20230820.zip I just tested your latest version. Everything seems to work perfectly. Thanks a lot. I have one question like this. Why have I never been able to build an EDR-DOS kernel by running BAT files on a system other than FreeDos? RASM86.EXE seems to use FCB functions that have been deprecated from M$DOS and are only in FreeDos. Do the FCB functions work in EDR-DOS? I ask because when I try to build an EDR-DOS kernel in a system other than FreeDos (also in EDR-DOS itself) I get the message: "Sector not found reading drive ?:" - ? - drive number here (C drive when building on C, and drive Y when building on RAMDISK Y). |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 21.08.2023, 22:54 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> > Please test with my build that will be updated later today (in 22h from > > now), at https://pushbx.org/ecm/download/old/edrdos/20230820.zip > > I just tested your latest version. Everything seems to work perfectly. > Thanks a lot. Good to hear. > I have one question like this. Why have I never been able to build an > EDR-DOS kernel by running BAT files on a system other than FreeDos? > RASM86.EXE seems to use FCB functions that have been deprecated from M$DOS > and are only in FreeDos. According to my understanding, MS-DOS 7.10+ disables FCB I/O on FAT32 FS. I did not test that yet but the interrupt list hints at this. Perhaps it would work better on a FAT12 or FAT16 FS? > Do the FCB functions work in EDR-DOS? I ask > because when I try to build an EDR-DOS kernel in a system other than > FreeDos (also in EDR-DOS itself) I get the message: "Sector not found > reading drive ?:" - ? - drive number here (C drive when building on C, and > drive Y when building on RAMDISK Y). I did not test this yet. I may get around to it within the week, though I would first test it in dosemu2 (MFS-redirected DOS drives). That may yield a different result than operating on a (to DOS) local FAT FS. I found three FreeDOS bugs in the FCB directory search support while considering your post, though: https://github.com/FDOS/kernel/issues/112 --- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 29.08.2023, 17:49 @ CandyMan |
EDR-DOS development |
> I have one question like this. Why have I never been able to build an
> EDR-DOS kernel by running BAT files on a system other than FreeDos?
> RASM86.EXE seems to use FCB functions that have been deprecated from M$DOS
> and are only in FreeDos. Do the FCB functions work in EDR-DOS? I ask
> because when I try to build an EDR-DOS kernel in a system other than
> FreeDos (also in EDR-DOS itself) I get the message: "Sector not found
> reading drive ?:" - ? - drive number here (C drive when building on C, and
> drive Y when building on RAMDISK Y).
I just updated my EDR-DOS repo on the local machine (running a recent dosemu2 with KVM, on a Debian amd64 desktop system) and booted my EDR-DOS + dosemu2 diskette image. Using the --- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 29.08.2023, 18:26 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> I just updated my EDR-DOS repo on the local machine (running a recent
> dosemu2 with KVM, on a Debian amd64 desktop system) and booted my EDR-DOS +
> dosemu2 diskette image. Using the --- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 29.08.2023, 18:32 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
Did the same test using a normal (non-small) FAT32 file system, filling it initially with a 120 MB file to avoid the source files ending up with low cluster numbers:
--- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 29.08.2023, 18:49 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
And another test:
--- |
| Rugxulo Usono, 29.08.2023, 23:28 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> Actually, I noticed that to non-interactively overwrite a file using COPY,
> FreeCOM requires the COPY switch /Y, while EDR-DOS command defaults to
> overwriting. I added
> a /Y switch to EDR-DOS, which is a no-op by default. (It does
> override /C if both are used.) This makes my modified |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 30.08.2023, 09:47 @ Rugxulo |
EDR-DOS development |
> > Actually, I noticed that to non-interactively overwrite a file using
> COPY,
> > FreeCOM requires the COPY switch /Y, while EDR-DOS command defaults to
> > overwriting. I
> added
> > a /Y switch to EDR-DOS, which is a no-op by default. (It does
> > override /C if both are used.) This makes my modified
> --- |
| roytam 29.12.2023, 15:33 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS development |
> >
> > By the way, I noticed that the 714E/714F function in EDR-DOS doesn't
> seem
> > to work. After running Dos Navigator 2 (DN2 for Win32) using HX dos
> > extender only directories are visible (no files).
>
> I was confused by your wording here, you wrote "after running DN2"
> but I think you meant *when* running DN2 then in the application only
> directories are visible.
>
> If I am correct in that then I fixed that bug. It also affected 7-Zip which
> wants to get all files for a |
| Ro2003 10.10.2023, 16:24 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS repository |
> I took the opportunity to create an EDR-DOS repo on our server, at
> https://hg.pushbx.org/ecm/edrdos (I interpret the new CP/M and derivatives
> license agreement as of 2022-07-07 as including EDR-DOS, so it should be
> fine to host it. This license agreement is in the file license.htm in the
> repo's root directory.)
>
> > PS: I noticed that you are also working on the RxDOS kernel. Is it
> stable?
>
> No, far from it. And I'm not technically working on it currently. Haven't
> in a long time. You can view the current state in the repo:
> https://hg.pushbx.org/ecm/rxdos-7.2x/
I'm happy to see this updated EDR-DOS 7.01.08 WIP! EDR-DOS repository also got a Github mirror.
Now that the license is opened - it would be great if the EDR-DOS branch gets reunited with DR-DOS 7.07.
Matthias Paul once wrote:
> I still have not completely lost hope, that at some fine day in the future the current owner of the DR-DOS assets may decide that its commercial life is finally over and that it is due to open source the system. This would make it possible to reunificate the different code branches to create the most advanced DR-DOS ever for all its fans. Well, well... |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 12.10.2023, 19:04 @ Ro2003 |
EDR-DOS repository |
> > I took the opportunity to create an EDR-DOS repo on our server, at
> > https://hg.pushbx.org/ecm/edrdos (I interpret the new CP/M and
> derivatives
> > license agreement as of 2022-07-07 as including EDR-DOS, so it should be
> > fine to host it. This license agreement is in the file license.htm in
> the
> > repo's root directory.)
> >
> > > PS: I noticed that you are also working on the RxDOS kernel. Is it
> > stable?
> >
> > No, far from it. And I'm not technically working on it currently.
> Haven't
> > in a long time. You can view the current state in the repo:
> > https://hg.pushbx.org/ecm/rxdos-7.2x/
>
> I'm happy to see this updated EDR-DOS 7.01.08 WIP! EDR-DOS repository also
> got a Github mirror.
>
> Now that the
> license is
> opened - it
> would be great if the EDR-DOS branch gets reunited with
> DR-DOS 7.07.
This would require, at least, either descriptions of what changed, or actual files of that version. Preferably both. Neither seems to be provided in that thread.
> Matthias Paul
> once
> wrote:
>
> > I still have not completely lost hope, that at some fine day in the
> future the current owner of the DR-DOS assets may decide that its
> commercial life is finally over and that it is due to open source the
> system. This would make it possible to reunificate the different code
> branches to create the most advanced DR-DOS ever for all its fans. Well,
> well... --- |
| Ro2003 13.10.2023, 08:23 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS repository |
> I don't think it is required to combine the file. It is good for other reasons though. What are the other reasons? I think it's worth to reach out to Matthias Paul and Bryan Sparks (and other former team members, if you know any) to ask for DR-DOS binaries or sources. Especially since Matthias himself was mentioning that it'll be good to merge EDR-DOS 7.01.xx and DR-DOS 7.07. Maybe they can help also with the DOS memory maps in the load process. |
| nico7550 13.10.2023, 15:53 @ Ro2003 |
EDR-DOS repository |
> > I don't think it is required to combine the file. It is good for other > reasons though. > > What are the other reasons? > > > I think it's worth to reach out to Matthias Paul and Bryan Sparks (and > other former team members, if you know any) to ask for DR-DOS binaries or > sources. > Especially since Matthias himself was mentioning that it'll be good to > merge EDR-DOS 7.01.xx and DR-DOS 7.07. > Maybe they can help also with the DOS memory maps in the load process. I try myself to reach Paul but without success, I hope you will have more luck. And same for CandyMan |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 13.10.2023, 18:16 @ Ro2003 |
EDR-DOS repository - Single-file kernel load |
> > I don't think it is required to combine the file. It is good for other > reasons though. > > What are the other reasons? Several: * BIO and DOS file can get out of sync, potentially resulting in failures to boot or even data corruption. * One more file to keep track of. * Need a FAT FS read implementation in the BIO that is only ever used to read the DOS file, this is in bdosldr.a86 for EDR-DOS, called by the BIO init routines here. * The BIO kernel has to locate the DOS file, meaning it will have to include a directory scanner. (Arguably, lDOS iniload contains just as much of a FAT FS reader (to read the remainder of the kernel file) as EDR-DOS's BIO file, but lDOS iniload certainly does not need a directory scanner.) * Compression of kernel files also needs two bespoke solutions, one for each file, whereas lDOS iniload + inicomp has a single compression stage which depacks the entire remaining kernel. This can make for better compression ratio than compressing two files, too. Back in the day I discussed this with Udo in the EDR-DOS forums. However, that thread is likely lost to time. I recall that Udo brought up you can update one of the files without the other, and vendors could get away with only providing a BIO file sharing a common DOS file that they wouldn't have to know much about. At the time I already noted that this last advantage is minor if the entire kernel is available as free software. The second link that I included in my list also hints it is possible for the DOS to be resident somewhere already, and not have the BIO load it from a file. This means part of the work towards a single-file kernel may already be done. --- |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 13.10.2023, 18:23 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS repository - Single-file kernel load |
Another advantage is you may be able to share more code between the entire kernel than if you split it into two files. And some build time calculations may be possible to optimise things that a two-file kernel cannot do. (In lRxDOS's single-assembly build, NASM can potentially calculate things that even a single-file kernel build cannot if you use a linker to link multiple object files into one executable.) --- |
| Ro2003 10.10.2023, 16:32 @ ecm |
EDR-DOS version number |
Regarding version number - to avoid past confusion cases - would be nice if: - 6.5, 7.5, 8.5, etc. are reserved for use in emulators - by analogy with NTVDM - 7.01.08 WIP is kept as "work in progress" and version is not increased to 7.01.09. That's the case with this update here, which is good! - 7.08 and 7.09 are reserved for IBMBIO/IBMDOS/COMMAND combination that provides all functionality of EDR-DOS 7.01.08 and DR-DOS 7.07 - 7.1 is reserved for IBMBIO/IBMDOS/COMMAND combination that provides all functionality of MS-DOS 7.1, PC DOS 7.1, DR-DOS 7.07, EDR-DOS 7.01.08 - 8.2 is reserved for IBMBIO/IBMDOS/COMMAND combination that provides all functionality of MS-DOS 8.0, PC DOS 7.1, DR-DOS 7.07, EDR-DOS 7.01.08, DR-DOS 8.0, DR-DOS 8.1, RxDOS 7.2x - 8.3 and up are reserved for UEFI versions or at least used with restrain - 9.x gets reserved for future substantial change. - incremental changes to get increase only in the x.xx.rr revision rather than the minor/major version number, e.g. use the 7.01.08 WIP until it gets merged with 7.07, then 7.09.rr until all 7.1 functionality is included, then 7.1x.rr until all 8.1 functionality is included, etc. |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 12.10.2023, 19:08 @ Ro2003 |
EDR-DOS version number |
> Regarding version number - to avoid past confusion cases - would be nice > if: > > - 6.5, 7.5, 8.5, etc. are reserved for use in emulators - by analogy with > NTVDM > - 7.01.08 WIP is kept as "work in progress" and version is not increased to > 7.01.09. That's the case with this update here, which is good! If I will do more work on EDR-DOS I am considering a 7.01.09 or beyond. But that remains to be seen. > - 7.08 and 7.09 are reserved for IBMBIO/IBMDOS/COMMAND combination that > provides all functionality of EDR-DOS 7.01.08 and DR-DOS 7.07 > - 7.1 is reserved for IBMBIO/IBMDOS/COMMAND combination that provides all > functionality of MS-DOS 7.1, PC DOS 7.1, DR-DOS 7.07, EDR-DOS 7.01.08 > - 8.2 is reserved for IBMBIO/IBMDOS/COMMAND combination that provides all > functionality of MS-DOS 8.0, PC DOS 7.1, DR-DOS 7.07, EDR-DOS 7.01.08, > DR-DOS 8.0, DR-DOS 8.1, RxDOS 7.2x > - 8.3 and up are reserved for UEFI versions or at least used with restrain > - 9.x gets reserved for future substantial change. > - incremental changes to get increase only in the x.xx.rr revision rather > than the minor/major version number, e.g. use the 7.01.08 WIP until it gets > merged with 7.07, then 7.09.rr until all 7.1 functionality is included, > then 7.1x.rr until all 8.1 functionality is included, etc. Don't have much of a comment on any of this. --- |
| glennmcc North Jackson, Ohio (USA), 13.08.2023, 22:19 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> I released new versions DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 > Question... What ever happened to Udo ? --- |
| glennmcc North Jackson, Ohio (USA), 29.08.2023, 23:04 @ glennmcc |
What ever happened to Udo ? |
> > I released new versions DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 > > > > Question... > > What ever happened to Udo ? No reply at-all ?? --- |
| Ro2003 10.10.2023, 16:10 @ glennmcc |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> > I released new versions DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 > > > > Question... > > What ever happened to Udo ? The last post by Udo Kuhnt in his forum, 2012-Feb-02 is mentioned here, but link is broken and I can't find an archive of it. Any clues on that? |
| glennmcc North Jackson, Ohio (USA), 10.10.2023, 21:35 @ Ro2003 |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> > > I released new versions DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 > > > > > > > Question... > > > > What ever happened to Udo ? > > The last > post by Udo Kuhnt in his forum, 2012-Feb-02 is mentioned > here, > but link is broken and I can't find an archive of it. Any clues on that? Way back 10yrs ago in this thread, DOS386 insinuated that Udo had died but never clarified if that statement was just figuratively due to the status of his Enhanced DR-DOS project or if it was meant literally and Udo was actually physically dead. http://www.bttr-software.de/forum/forum_entry.php?id=12870 --- |
| boeckmann Aachen, Germany, 12.12.2023, 17:04 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
I made some changes to the latest EDR-DOS sources maintained by ecm: - re-implement proprietary FIXUPP utility with open source version - fixed bug in DRDOS.SYS div32 function, leading to division errors on partitions with more than 66535 FAT sectors. There is also a div32 function in DRBIO.SYS present, but it did not contain the bug. - create FAT-32 default BPB for FAT-32 partitions instead of FAT-16 default BPB, which prevented FreeDOS format from formatting such a partition as FAT-32 - make DRDOS.SYS linkable with OpenWatcom wlink by adding missing group definitions and running FIXUPP on all RASM86 produced object files. - create Watcom makefiles for DRBIO.SYS and DRDOS.SYS (using wlink) Repository is located at https://github.com/SvarDOS/edrdos |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 12.12.2023, 18:47 @ boeckmann |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> I made some changes to the latest EDR-DOS sources maintained by ecm:
>
> - fixed bug in DRDOS.SYS div32 function, leading to division errors on
> partitions with more than 66535 FAT sectors. There is also a div32 function
> in DRBIO.SYS present, but it did not contain the bug.
https://github.com/SvarDOS/edrdos/commit/167fe71ec058f80b7da47f11f2a34fc66938ad57
--- |
| boeckmann Aachen, Germany, 12.12.2023, 21:15 @ ecm |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> > I made some changes to the latest EDR-DOS sources maintained by ecm:
> >
> > - fixed bug in DRDOS.SYS div32 function, leading to division errors on
> > partitions with more than 66535 FAT sectors. There is also a div32
> function
> > in DRBIO.SYS present, but it did not contain the bug.
>
> https://github.com/SvarDOS/edrdos/commit/167fe71ec058f80b7da47f11f2a34fc66938ad57
>
> |
| boeckmann Aachen, Germany, 12.12.2023, 21:27 @ boeckmann |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> I first thought that the xor cx,cx can be eliminated too, by clearing the > result after the xor dx,dx. But the xor cx,cx leaves the flags in a defined > state, which the div does not. So I think it is safer to leave this xor > cx,cx in. It probably IS save. Because everytime div32 is used in the source, an addition follows that sets the flags anyway. So I will try to further optimize this and incorporate your suggestion regarding the two divisions on 16-bit divisor. |
| CandyMan 13.12.2023, 16:58 @ boeckmann |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> > I first thought that the xor cx,cx can be eliminated too, by clearing
> the
> > result after the xor dx,dx. But the xor cx,cx leaves the flags in a
> defined
> > state, which the div does not. So I think it is safer to leave this xor
> > cx,cx in.
>
> It probably IS save. Because everytime div32 is used in the source, an
> addition follows that sets the flags anyway. So I will try to further
> optimize this and incorporate your suggestion regarding the two divisions
> on 16-bit divisor.
You can convert the code below for Int64 to Int32 and replace the 32-bit registers with 16-bit registers to skip the 32-time loop.
|
| boeckmann Aachen, Germany, 14.12.2023, 18:00 @ CandyMan |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> You can convert the code below for Int64 to Int32 and replace the 32-bit
> registers with 16-bit registers to skip the 32-time loop.
Thanks for the code. I can not convert it one by one, because the DRSYS div32 procedure also returns the remainder, but I get the idea...
However, for now I decided to leave the shifting algorithm as it is, mainly because it is a code path not often taken, and i want to fix more things than I break |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 14.12.2023, 20:58 @ boeckmann |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> > You can convert the code below for Int64 to Int32 and replace the 32-bit
> > registers with 16-bit registers to skip the 32-time loop.
>
> Thanks for the code. I can not convert it one by one, because the DRSYS
> div32 procedure also returns the remainder, but I get the idea...
>
> However, for now I decided to leave the shifting algorithm as it is, mainly
> because it is a code path not often taken, and i want to fix more things
> than I break --- |
| boeckmann Aachen, Germany, 16.12.2023, 21:52 @ ecm |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> Looks good to me. Dispatching to either the two-step division or a single one is new to me. I do think you could save code space at the cost of some performance by just dropping the test and jz. Zero divided by CX is always zero.
Thanks, used the |
| ecm Düsseldorf, Germany, 30.12.2023, 14:27 @ boeckmann |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
Note that I accidentally edited your post rather than replying to it. Here's my reply as its own post as it should have been posted.
> Thanks, used the --- |
| boeckmann Aachen, Germany, 01.01.2024, 13:57 @ ecm |
New version DRDOS 7.01.7 & 7.01.8 |
> Note that I accidentally edited your post rather than replying to
> it. Here's my reply as its own post as it should have been posted.
>
> > Thanks, used the |
Thread view
There is only advertisement.
The div32 procedure is mainly called with 512 as the divisor (to calculate sectors and offsets into the FAT). So 99% of the time, the optimized 16-bit shortcut is used, I guess.
The current version is here: