"cr88192" <cr88192@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:14469$4765b840$ca8010a3$31668@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:fk4b6e$8d9$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > "James Harris" <james.harris.1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >
news:61e3ae1d-5797-4fa0-901c-f74dec70eb75@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> ...I want the code to be 32-bit and not tied to a particular
> >> OS.
> >>
> >> The ability to run effectively 32-bit .com files is what I
> >> have in mind.
> >>
> > 1) write your own startup - 16-bit RM to 32-bit PM as a .com
> > 2) DPMI startup - 16-bit RM to 16-bit PM to 32-bit PM
> > 3) Multiboot header
> > 4) your own bootloader
> >
> > 1) and 2) work for older versions of Windows (95,98,ME). I use both
of
> > these. I just patch them onto the start of the 32-bit code I need to
> > check.
> > But I'm unsure if XP etc. have sufficient v86 or DPMI sup****t...
> >
> > 3) You could add a multiboot header. This header allows multiboot
> > compliant
> > bootloaders, i.e., Grub, Chris Giese's MBLOAD for DOS, etc. to start
> > 32-bit
> > image from floppy, hardisk, etc.
> >
> > MBLOAD http://my.execpc.com/CE/AC/geezer/temp/mbload.zip
> >
> > 4) You could write your own bootloader with 32-bit PM startup.
> >
>
> I think the point is more that the OP has no idea what he is talking
about,
If one focuses on 32-bit .com, then perhaps not... But, I thought the
mention of a 32-bit .com indicated he was trying to reach a specific goal:
executing 32-bit code snippets - with minimal setup and minimal OS
interaction.
> rather than is aiming for OS-dev or similar...
>
> though, I guess, he could be talking about OS-dev, I can't really
tell...
>
I'm not sure why you assumed OS-dev. Although I'm developing an OS, I
don't
use them for OS-dev. I use them 1) and 2) to test 32-bit assembly code
snippets - with minimal setup and minimal OS interaction - mostly for
questions on NG's...
;-)
Rod Pemberton
|
