Dos Subsystem

The place to bring up any design issues, or post your own creations

Moderator: Moderator Team

crashfourit
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:27 am

Dos Subsystem

Post by crashfourit » Mon Nov 28, 2005 10:42 pm

I'm interested in starting to code the DOS subsystem.

So I am going to list some possible design principles:

Avoid excessive switching from V86 mode and Protected mode.
Limit direct access to system hardware by DOS programs (especially IO).
Must differentiate CPU exceptions and Software interrupts.
Each DOS process would have its own private first Megabyte of Memory.
At least DPMI v. 0.9 support.
Dos API support (Including Long File Name support.)

Possible design additions:
Native handling of DJGPP DPMI programs (I.E. skip DJGPP stub-loader and jump directly to the DJGPP COFF image).
Open GEM GUI API Support.
Bios and Video ROM virtualization.

Additions, subtractions, modifications, or comments anyone?

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Tue Nov 29, 2005 2:43 am

Ok dosbox.sf.net. Will help a little. It has speed issues but it will run windows 3.11 in side its self.

Good starting point. Sub system links to dosbox could improve performance.

cmoibenlepro
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:44 pm
Location: Canada

Post by cmoibenlepro » Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:28 am

BTW, scuse me if I'm off topic, but why do we need a dos subsystem?
I don't know why a user would be interested in running old dos programs made 10-15 years ago...

Dos is like a dinosaur, isn't it?

:?:

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:55 am

Said thing is that dos is not dead yet.

Programs from Win9x systems use dos calls in places.

Freedos is still alive and kicking. Its getting harder to kill stuff. Microsoft might think they killed dos but it did not die.

Yes and this is a little off topic from the graphical point of view. Open Gem is a new system not a old one.

ScoTTie
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 9:40 am

Post by ScoTTie » Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:00 pm

cmoibenlepro, quite alot of custom made business applications still require DOS. Even today i still see some smaller shops using old DOS POS applications. Not to mention all the classic games id love to run without the need of an emulator (ala DosBox)

witukind
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 3:53 pm

Post by witukind » Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:24 pm

ReactOS is NT not 9x. Really I wouldn't care at all for DOS compatibility when I can just install FreeDOS and have compatibility and speed. And btw... DosBox is a neatly designed and self-contained piece of software, and it's performance is just great. Runs very nicely even on a P200, so what's wrong about it?

loki1985
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:39 pm

Re: Dos Subsystem

Post by loki1985 » Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:37 pm

crashfourit wrote:Limit direct access to system hardware by DOS programs (especially IO).
i think DOS programs should have NO direct hardware access at all, since then they could eventually crash the system / make it unstable (at least no unattended access).

maybe some sort of supervising could take place, or, much better, emulate the direct access....

Mrkaras
Posts: 379
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 5:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Mrkaras » Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:31 pm

Can the dos programs think they have full direct hardware access while actualy using the proper api chennels, like the first mb of memory, they think it is the first MB there using but it is not actualy the first MB of ram.

I think a dos subsystem would be an inportant addition to reactos. dos game networking would be good (IPX direct hardware access i think).

m1423
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 3:06 pm

Post by m1423 » Tue May 02, 2006 4:11 pm

Don't forget about one of DOS's more powerful features, the wildcard. Very useful when you have a lot of files and you only need to do something with some of them. DOS is needed, don't leave it out.

Phalanx
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 12:42 am
Location: Australia

Post by Phalanx » Tue May 02, 2006 4:41 pm

m1423 wrote:Don't forget about one of DOS's more powerful features, the wildcard. Very useful when you have a lot of files and you only need to do something with some of them. DOS is needed, don't leave it out.
That is got to do with the shell, not DOS.

Harteex
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by Harteex » Tue May 02, 2006 5:42 pm

I would really love to see a DOS subsystem.
DOSBox is too slow... some of my DOS games are very slow with it on my Amd64 2000+.

EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4323
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Post by EmuandCo » Tue May 02, 2006 10:15 pm

Hmm a DOS Subsystem... Settlers on ReactOS.... hmmmm

Harteex
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by Harteex » Wed May 03, 2006 12:42 am

EmuandCo wrote:Hmm a DOS Subsystem... Settlers on ReactOS.... hmmmm
mm.. Settlers II Gold Edition.. :)


crashfourit: Are you still interested in coding this or have you dropped the idea?

GreatLord
Developer
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 10:26 am
Location: Sweden

Post by GreatLord » Wed May 03, 2006 9:53 am

We have part of dos system in ros
om NT it call VDM finish it u maybe can run old games
I prefer using dosbox

Dr. Fred
Developer
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:09 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Post by Dr. Fred » Wed May 03, 2006 12:17 pm

GreatLord wrote:We have part of dos system in ros
om NT it call VDM finish it u maybe can run old games
I prefer using dosbox
Our current subsystem is just a stub which does nothing yet. We do not even have the functionality in the kernel. I think the reactos project has other priorities at the moment.
Where do you want ReactOS to go today ?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests