Bored Developer Creates 'DOS Subsystem For Linux' (itnews.com.au) 56
Long-time Slashdot reader Bismillah quotes iTnews:
A software engineer in Melbourne is whiling away the city's lockdown by creating a tool that DOS users so far have lacked: an integrated Linux environment similar to what Windows 10 users enjoy...
"I first started out just seeing if I could get Linux booting from the DOS command line, and that turned out to be straightforward enough so I thought it'd be fun to see if I could continue executing DOS once Linux was running," Charlie Somerville said. "I'm mostly surprised by how smoothly the whole thing works given how *dodgy* it all is haha," he added. DOS Subsystem for Linux runs a real copy of MS-DOS under the QEMU virtual machine, and starts up from that, Somerville said...
"Helpfully Linux seems to leave the first megabyte of memory (where DOS lives) intact during its own boot process, so it's just a matter of jumping back to the right place to continue DOS execution," he added. Somerville had it pointed out to him that this approach of running DOS under vm8086 is actually how early Windows worked.
"Kinda cool to rediscover the technique so many years later," Somerville said.
"I first started out just seeing if I could get Linux booting from the DOS command line, and that turned out to be straightforward enough so I thought it'd be fun to see if I could continue executing DOS once Linux was running," Charlie Somerville said. "I'm mostly surprised by how smoothly the whole thing works given how *dodgy* it all is haha," he added. DOS Subsystem for Linux runs a real copy of MS-DOS under the QEMU virtual machine, and starts up from that, Somerville said...
"Helpfully Linux seems to leave the first megabyte of memory (where DOS lives) intact during its own boot process, so it's just a matter of jumping back to the right place to continue DOS execution," he added. Somerville had it pointed out to him that this approach of running DOS under vm8086 is actually how early Windows worked.
"Kinda cool to rediscover the technique so many years later," Somerville said.
640K (Score:4, Funny)
Because 640K is enough memory for anyone, right?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, As a high school kid - I wrote payroll and inventory systems which ran on a Trash-80.
Re: (Score:2)
More likely a Level II 16K TRS-80 - Or a 48K unit with the Expansion Interface.
Re: (Score:1)
Didn't know there was a 4K trs-80. I worked on a 4K Ohio Scientific Challenger. It was never enough space except for beginner stuff. However that's what we could afford.
Then it was back to figuring out nitrates and nitrides....
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, 4G is really not enough for anybody.
Re: (Score:2)
Because 640K is enough memory for anyone, right?
It's an absolutely true insight. Even if Bill Gates (probably) never said it.
In 1981, anyone looking to spend less than $10K on a computer for their home or office is not going to need more than 640K. Doubly so when most of these early PCs were purchased to replace an electronic typewriter and do some lightweight accounting tasks. IBM PC was around $1500 but fully loaded more like $6K, the main thing you could buy for it was a second floppy drive and more RAM (I think 256K before you had to use some ISA car
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't mean it's "enough", just what was available at the time given the current technology at the price a home user could afford. It certainly wasn't hard to run up against the limits on the Commodore 64, though admittedly 64K was 10 times less memory than a fully loaded IBM PC. I also remember using an IBM PC loaded up with 640K of memory. With DOS 3, Wordstar, and Lotus 123 I don't remember memory ever being an issue, though the IBM PC was certainly not as much fun than the Commodore.
Re: (Score:2)
With DOS 3, Wordstar, and Lotus 123 I don't remember memory ever being an issue, though the IBM PC was certainly not as much fun than the Commodore.
I used to hang around at Sears dicking with the computers while my mother shopped in the mall, and they had both some kind of PC (with EGA I think) and a C= 64, and a bunch of software for both platforms. ISTR they had some other kind of computer as well, but it currently escapes me what it might have been. And the PC kicked the crap out of the commode. It ought to have, because it was a much more expensive piece of equipment. But games like flight simulators were far superior on it because of the additiona
Re: (Score:2)
Dollar for dollar the C=64 was a better deal than a PC for gaming. Especially before the introduction of EGA (1984).
But by 1985, the Amiga 1000 was out and blew the PC away in graphics and sound (at that time it would have been an IBM AT or compatible, with a 286 CPU). Even with an 80286, EGA and an Adlib card, the PC was no match for an Amiga 1000 for gaming. (I believe they would have been similarly priced, depending on exactly how you configured your PC and if you went with a clone instead of a true IBM)
Re: (Score:2)
I got into the Amiga when it had become cheaper. You could get an A500, three software titles, and a RF encoder for $599. An upgrade to 1MB RAM and a RTC was another $99. No PC under about $1500 could touch its gaming capabilities. The original soundblaster had only a single channel, and 256kB VGA produced far less impressive results than the Amiga could deliver because the performance was so poor. It wasn't until a bit later that PCs even got accelerated 2d video, which was needed to compete with the rate
Re: (Score:2)
VGA performance is excellent if programmed correctly, where you can read-modify-write 32-bits in a single byte/word access thanks to latch registers.. Naively programmed the performance is abysmal on VGA. It's a similar issue on the Amiga but the naïve method on Amiga is quite a bit faster than naïve VGA programming.
I think why PC won and Amiga lost is complex. Part of it is the entrenchment of IBM compatibility. Part of it is the management at Commodore dropped the ball. Part of it is the custome
Re:News flash... (Score:5, Interesting)
Bored engineer reinvents DOSBox [dosbox.com] for Linux rather than installing the Linux version of DOSBox.
Not really. This is more like LinuxBox for DOS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And the version that comes with Twister OS for the raspberry pi will run x86 dos programs, unmodified. Though meant for games there, I'm using it for an old favorite CAD program - traxedit (or easytrax) which has a very easy learning curve to just make pcbs.
Reinvent LOADLIN (Score:4, Informative)
Basically, they reinvented LOADLIN [wikipedia.org], including some of the customisations that existed back then that allowed to keep the DOS memory around (and thus gave the possibility to fall back to DOS after shutting down Linux).
(Plus probably some code to run that actual copy of DOS when inside a DOSbox/DOSEMU, roughly the same way it is possible to run the actualy VESA BIOS in some of those boxes ? Probably, but I am to lazy to RTFA)
Re: (Score:2)
You fail to understand that this is NOT a way to run DOS on LINUX (like DOSBox). It's the other way around. A way to run Linux on DOS.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry. Why would I want to boot into DOS to run Linux?
The answer is right in the title: boredom.
The perfect OS... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
DOS as a boot loader (Score:2)
I'm sorry. Why would I want to boot into DOS to run Linux?
Back in the days (late 90s), it enabled you to use DOS as a bootloader mini OS (basically the same way you can use Grub or the EFI Shell nowadays).
- every PC-compatible under the sun back then could boot MS-DOS.
- DOS is able to then boot into Windows 9x / ME (that's the normal way it booted under the hood. "Starting DOS mode" under Win9x is actually simply exiting Windows and falling back to DOS).
- Thanks to LOADLIN, you could also use MS-DOS to load and boot a Linux kernel (and opti
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks man, indeed loadlin.exe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
I am pretty sure that was an .exe, not a .com since it needed to do more fancy stuff than a .com could do. I could dig into my old diskette images if needed to find out.
By the way, you were fooled into replying to one of cre|mer sock puppet account's post.
--
my 2 cents
COM/EXE (Score:2)
I am pretty sure that was an .exe, not a .com
In that era, there isn't much difference between a .COM and a .EXE suffix: .EXE or .COM. .COM but has an MZ signature and thus is actually internally an .EXE format (because in most modern DOSes, it contains more than 64k worth of data).
both denote a binary executable file, but by the late 90s, the actual format is recognized by looking at the 'MZ' signature at the beginning of the file, not whether it ends in
COMMAND.COM is an example of such file whose name ends up in
The only real practical difference in n
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then it's a 'Linux Subsystem For DOS'. Title is misleading.
Re: (Score:2)
No. It's a subsystem in DOS. For Linux. It follows the WSL = Windows Subsystem for Linux.
To be interpreted as DOS (possessive) Subsystem (of the possessing parent) for Linux (the beneficiary who is faciliated).
Re: (Score:1)
Bored engineer reinvents DOSBox [dosbox.com] for Linux rather than installing the Linux version of DOSBox.
Congratulations! This is the dumbest post I ever witnessed on Slashdot!
--
-Adam Sarword
Same but Different (Score:2)
Isn't this kinda what DJGPP is? And booting Linux from DOS - syslinux?
Re:Same but Different (Score:5, Insightful)
My understanding is that syslinux boots Linux from DOS, but it replaces DOS. This project leaves DOS running, and Linux keeps returning to it to give it time do its own stuff.
Useful? No.
Cool? Yes.
Linux '95 (Score:3)
(See subject)
MonkeyLinux - Linux running on top of DOS (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Better yet ... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
it's in the next version. Incidentally they're also deprecating Linux in the next version.
Re: (Score:2)
they're also deprecating Linux
So, just launch emacs. If you want Linux, there's a keystroke shortcut.
I use a DOS program on production (Score:2)
As someone who uses a very old DOS program in production, I'm quite interested. If I somehow get to have a more than half decent DOS environment, as in "works in full screen", can use installed printers/devices and is not painfully slow (I'm looking at you, Win7 DOS!), then I may even move some of my production machines to Linux.
Must admit I have high hopes for this kind of news. There are several people I know that are, as of today, forced to stay on XP for the DOS support.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
There's OS/2 if you need DOS support on modern hardware. Under UEFI, DOS full screen sessions work surprisingly well. Sees your USB mouse and keyboard fine, will run most DOS drivers as DOS runs in ring 2. Mostly uses CUPS for printing via the OS/2 system.
Doesn't really support long file names though and can't handle partitions/disks over 2TB (well truncated to 2TB) and they currently need a MBR and cylinder alignment for partitions but I believe real DOS has those same limitions.
https://www.arcanoae.com/ [arcanoae.com] f
Re: (Score:2)
This wont help as this run DOS on the hardware and Linux runs under the DOS, so in your case, XP -> DOS -> Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
There are several people I know that are, as of today, forced to stay on XP for the DOS support.
What's preventing you from using some 386-based SBCs, and some kind of actual DOS? I presume the reason you're not just running a bunch of VMs is that you need support for some kind of interface hardware.
Loadlin? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Loadlin probably replaces it, but a subsystem may coesixt. Linux starts as DOS program (exe). Initially it disables DOS shell (by calling INTs into lower real-mode memory), just like DOS programs did.
loadlin.exe (Score:2)
Lockdown (Score:2)
A software engineer in Melbourne is whiling away the city’s lockdown
There are places still on lockdown?
Re: Lockdown (Score:2)
Yes, to combat a second wave caused by a government fuckup.
Restrictions may ease soon - New cases have shrunk from 600/day to under 20/day.
Re: (Score:1)
Considering the first wave was in early March and the second wave is in late June, early July, it's pretty evident of a second wave rather than false positives...
Additionally Australia uses multiple tests to confirm cases, not just PCR tests. These include rapid antigen tests for viral protein and serology antibody
Bored Developer Recreates Dragon Linux Project (Score:2)
Those were the days (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I wanted to port PCem to bare metal on an RPi (Score:2)
But I ended up making a USB stick with Alpine linux and setup mingetty on tty1 as an autologin to pcem inside a fullscreen X session. In the end I wasn't all that happy with the performance on my RPi 2.
I think with an RPi 4 and a newer PCem, patched DOSbox, or qemu it might be better. Going bare metal is probably not even worth it to me anymore as the smallest USB stick I have is 4GB and my image ended up being only a few hundred megabytes.
things that didn't work well or I never hacked up but wanted to: usb
See also: Loadlin (Score:2)
Loadlin essentially loaded Linux from DOS. However nobody was insane enough to try to continue running DOS inside of it.
BTW Microsoft does the same with it's "Windows" product line. You can see that when you start a TSR, then start Windows and then start a DOS Window. That Window will have the TSR available.
It would be interesting (Score:2)
Helpfully Linux seems to leave the first megabyte of memory (where DOS lives) intact during its own boot process, so it's just a matter of jumping back to the right place to continue DOS execution
It would be interesting to test if a DOS with loaded EMM386 and SMARTDRV will survive this transition. Because this combo needs and uses the high memory (over 1Mb).
alias (Score:2)