lproven at gmail.com
Tue Nov 21 13:15:00 CST 2017
On 21 November 2017 at 19:16, Tomasz Rola <rtomek at ceti.pl> wrote:
> As of "things" mentioned above, my current understanding is, those may
> be both active code (virri, worrmms etc), as well as Darth Vader's
> hand reaching out from the inside of VM and manipulating bits of
> memory on hosting machine. Chances are, I worry too much about this,
> but I suppose Pentium does not make a good platform for running VMs,
> only a cheap one (although it used to look like a decent one, but
> today it is only cheap).
A file-based virus could escape _if_ the VM had access to the host
filesystem. But mine don't, partly because it's moderately hard,
partly because it takes a _ton_ of RAM in DOS terms.
I should devote more effort to it but it's not massively useful to me
so I've not.
But it can't propagate if the host OS can't run DOS binaries.
> My current understanding is, emulators without JIT should be more
> decent. They sometimes enable one to have a peek into running
> "machine", which might be nice thing to have, too. And speedwise, they
> should be much closer to the original ;-P
I am trying to avoid emulators. This is the original native OS of x86
PC-compatible hardware. I want it to run on the metal.
> Well, owing to lack of time, I am so far from creating anything like
> "my own" that any actual problem with more interesting stuff just does
> not come into my mind (and I have close to zero knowledge about
> Desqview, which I regret because it looks great on those pictures out
> there). Most probably I will go with some frankensteinish solution
> involving Dosemu or Dosbox,
DOSbox is an emulator, so I've not looked at it. Ditto Bochs.
DOSemu works but it's not very stable. It's easy to crash it and lose
I don't think there's much chance of getting DESQview or anything
ambitious like that running on it.
> whichever could run assembler without a
I don't understand that bit.
> Emacs on native side for editing,
> thus hybrid
Well, yes, with host-based multitasking, you don't need in-VM multitasking.
But on the metal, it could potentially be useful. Mostly, though, it's
a toy and a tech demo.
> FreeDOS, for me, is the advanced way to do it, but as
> the developers keep improving it (prepackaged utils and stuff), so I
> might actually go for it - laziness pays.
As you prefer. It has a _very_ slow release cycle, though.
> But the main reason for me
> to go there would be to play with assembler, rather than with other
DOS assembler can be run on almost anything. MS-DOS, PC DOS, DR-DOS,
> There are also MenuetOS and KolibriOS, which look like nice "couldbe"
> multiplexers for Dosbox, but I am not sure (would have to find time to
> research) if there is any possibility to run DOS programs under their
> control (and I could not find explicit answer in few minutes).
They're not DOS-compatible, AFAIK.
> Tomasz Rola
> ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. **
> ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home **
> ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... **
> ** **
> ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com **
Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk • Google Mail/Talk/Plus: lproven at gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR/WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal: +420 702 829 053
More information about the cctalk