Open Source OS that Uses BIOS for Drive Access? 46
"Why can't Linux use a virtual x86 box to call INT 13h when there is no driver for a particular drive type? It would also have to play nice with the BIOS data area and extended BIOS data area and respect the top of low memory, but that's only a few kilobytes at most. Then people probably wouldn't need a DOS boot disk anymore. If such a thing already exists, is there some reason the install disks for most distros don't support it?
(Before anyone tries to claim that Linux plays nice with the extended BIOS data area and the top of low memory, I can tell you from personal experience that it definitely does not, at least not by default).
Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:1)
Re:Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:2)
FreeDOS worked for me last night (Score:2, Informative)
I'm now MS free. b)
Re:FreeDOS worked for me last night (Score:1)
Yesterday I was at work, installing Windows drivers on a computer equipped with an ASUS motherboard. After rebooting I suddenly noticed a FreeDOS prompt staring at me. It turned out that the driver/utility CD that Asus had provided with the Motherboard (which I had left in the drive) was equipped with a bootable FreeDOS distribution. Although I didn't need it at the time, I thought to myself how convenient this feature could be in many situations.
Clever thinking,
Re:Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:1)
Try using it... eeek
Why should we be forced to use DOS (nothing against MS here) when I am sure that an OSS project could be implemented and go on to become as popular as DOS boot disks.
Afaik there is no support I know of - don't ask me why - I looked into it a while ago and was aghast. I know that BeOS (ver. 5) has a feature like this, and can't imagine it being overly difficult to create.
Just my $0.02
Re:Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:1)
Re:Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:2, Interesting)
Why should we be forced to use DOS (nothing against MS here) when I am sure that an OSS project could be implemented and go on to become as popular as DOS boot disks.
How are "DOS" and "an OSS project" mutually exclusive in light of FreeDOS (which several others have mentioned) and the DJGPP compiler suite [delorie.com]?
Re:Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:1)
Re:Nothing wrong with DOS (Score:1)
Try using it... eeek
I did for about 5 years until work forced Win 95b on me. At the time I swore I could automate ANY task using batch files (shell scripts - if you are too young). DOS's biggest down fall was complete and total lack of forethought. Every change that came about was like an aftermarket bolt-on for a car. To maintain backwards compatibility everything was a hack to add another feature.
I mean what is DOS really? Its an OS that lets you load and run a program. Is
This isn't the interesting question to ask. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This isn't the interesting question to ask. (Score:1)
Chances are these days we do not need floppies, but nothing is forcing you to use them
An old box of mine doesn't have a CD drive, only a floppy and net
Re:This isn't the interesting question to ask. (Score:2)
It's silly to still be manacled to this outdated, ridiculous technology.
Yes. Right. Absolutely. Correct.
In real life, though, when your computer starts to sink beneath the waves, when you're almost ready to believe you have bad hardware, you'll grow to love that manacle to the life preserver floppy.
It's an ugly piece of trash, to be sure, but it does float.
Re:This isn't the interesting question to ask. (Score:3, Insightful)
Some boot loaders such as GRUB which DO use INT 13 actually do quite a bit. They are almost as much (and maybe more so) of an OS than DOS was, and are quite small.
GRUB may actually be a good replacement
Re:This isn't the interesting question to ask. (Score:2)
Ignoring your (sarcastic?) main point, instead re:
How long then before mainstrean manufacturers start shipping a standardized small "boot" or "rescue" O.S in their bios, with some kind of user interface, core device drivers and a few tools, available at boot time either in addition to or as a replacement for the bios options screen.
It would seem pretty simple to just include DOS (or some open source alternative) using part of the bios as a boo
Re:This isn't the interesting question to ask. (Score:3, Interesting)
How long then before mainstrean manufacturers start shipping a standardized small "boot" or "rescue" O.S in their bios, with some kind of user interface, core device drivers and a few tools, available at boot time either in addition to or as a replacement for the bios options screen.
2 comments;
1.44MB bios files can be pre-compressed and then decompressed on the fly. (Some PC BIOS utilities do this already.)
Some PC system BIOSes already
Re:This isn't the interesting question to ask. (Score:2)
It's called Open Firmware [http], and used on Macs as well. It provides a way to have a driver built into an expansion card that's machine independent, a complete Forth interpreter, and a really nice hardware diagnostics/debugging system (as long as you know a bit of Forth). I've
Mac Classic, too... (Score:2)
--- I think it was, unless that was goofy nosegrind to Christ Air combo.
Easy, yet unknown (Score:2, Informative)
Hello? (Score:4, Interesting)
Secondly, I can't see any reason, other than performance why Linux couldn't work off of Int13 , and use Bios-level calls for all disk access. It's probably a good idea, and it would get use to some nice places.
Thirdly, the reason that the OEMs are using dos boot disks for bios updates and whatnot, is because it is far more simple, predictable and stable to use an OS that doesn't have anything clever going on when you are flashing the BIOS.
and Finally, simplicity. DOS is downright stupidly simple to build a boot disk for, and the commands are simple to use, and it is simple to talk someone thru an operation over the phone.
I know that there are many people who can build a boot disk for linux and they will come out of the woodwork to say it's easy, but it ain't as easy as SYS'ing a disk and dumping on IO.SYS
That, and try finding a Linux disk that is smaller than 300K ( as even the bloated IO.SYS/MSDOS.SYS/COMMAND.COM combo from Win98 is) and you'll find that it is just not going to fit.
Re:Hello? (Score:1)
Re:Hello? (Score:1)
Re:Hello? (Score:2)
Maybe loss of control? (Score:2)
Having written a few device drivers for custom OSs, maybe I am out of date and talking out my hat here
AtheOS (Score:3)
AtheOS [atheos.cx] uses the BIOS for disk access, according to the website:
I have to wonder what AtheOS' disk performance is, though. It was common during the Windows 3.11 days for disk controller makers to produce 32-bit disk drivers for Windows that would bypass the BIOS and talk to the controller directly, thus avoiding expensive protected-to-real-mode-and-back switches.
cx domain (Score:3, Funny)
Re:cx domain (Score:2)
Actually, Most OS's will if you force them to (Score:2)
~GoRK
Re:Actually, Most OS's will if you force them to (Score:2)
Will Linux do? (Score:2)
fwbox# uptime
07:58:48 up 135 Days (3247h), load average: 0.16 0.03 0.01
fwbox#
Linux boots fine from the floppy, and next time I junk a computer and steal it's floppy this box will have a
Freshmeat is littered with projects that boot Linux from floppies, and I've used a few distros that boot nicely from CDs, and even played with a floppy booting linux that mounted a parallel port Z
Hypothesis (Score:2)
Using the bios is prolly slower. If the cpu can access the card across the bus directly, I'd wager that it's faster than going to the bios, which doesn't need to be the fastest thing in the world to access directly.
Why isn't there a chip on the board that's fast and generic would be my next question, unless they use the bus in place of the bios and skip the whole "standards" idea.
Firmware (Score:1, Interesting)
Personally I'd prefer to see x86 move away from the BIOS and toward the more advanced firmware solutions.
Re:Firmware (Score:1)
http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/platform/firmware/E FI/default.asp [microsoft.com]
Best thing to come out of Itanium, IMO.
Harking back to the thread a day or two ago about Intel's new software x86 emulator, and how "AMD64 is better anyway", I have to say that AMD64 doesn't have this, which makes it incredibly uncool in comparison. If you go Itanium with your server, you also ditch the old BIOS, and the nasty MBR too (Intel/MS have a new disk partitioning system, GPMmmsomething, whi
Sad news..... (Score:2)
The sad news is that the vendors' responses have been to switch from a DOS boot disk to either a bootable CD-ROM (not much of a difference in my mind) or a win32 utility, which REQUIRES you to have Windows installed in order to configure the device.
real-mode vs protected (Score:2)
Re:BIOS and DOS support on their way out (Score:1)
Find a boot disk? (Score:2)
I have not had to find a DOS bot disk for a long time. So I think the problem is a non-issue.
The decline in utility disks that don't boot probable has to do with win XP not supporting a true DOS mode.
Re:Find a boot disk? (Score:1)
BIOS not a reliable way to access devices anymore (Score:2)
In fact, this is getting to be a real problem with SYSLINUX-based installers and rescue disks--those fail with many machines using USB or FireWire CD-ROMs for booting.