Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10045254
That OS is also developed by me, but it was 32-bit and had design issues. So I redesigned it and rewrote it in 64-bit and here it is.
any long-term plan to add 32-bit compatibility, probably?
Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
21–28 of 28 posts
Re: Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Classic DOS barely took up kilobytes of memory. I think that qualifies as "tiny". Megabytes is downright bloated by comparison. Considering this is written in assembly, what is all that memory used for?
Well, for one thing, it's a graphical OS.
What does that have to do with anything? Windows 3.1 had a minimum RAM requirement of 1 MB. The base model of the Apple Lisa 2, which featured a graphical OS, had 512 KB of RAM. It's possible to have graphics without requiring so much RAM.
Re: Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
In all fairness, I think tiny in this case refers to the fact that the OS is only 200kb. From the openBSD install guide: OpenBSD can be installed in as little as 512MB, but using that small of a device is something for advanced users.
It might say that, but to be honest I had no difficulties installing on my box with 32 MB RAM. I didn't even have to do anything special; I just followed the normal installation procedure. It's not blazing fast by any means, but it does boot and it does work :)
Disk size, not RAM. How large a hard drive are you using?
Re: Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might say that, but to be honest I had no difficulties installing on my box with 32 MB RAM. I didn't even have to do anything special; I just followed the normal installation procedure. It's not blazing fast by any means, but it does boot and it does work :)
Disk size, not RAM. How large a hard drive are you using?
Ah. The HDD has 4 GB. This thing was top-of-the-line back in '98 when it was purchased ;)
Re: Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
#25Looks really cool. One thing, though: > tiny > RAM: 64 MB required, 192 MB recommended. That doesn't seem particularly tiny to me. I have an old Pentium II box with 32 MB of RAM that runs the latest release of OpenBSD with X, and I don't consider OpenBSD particularly tiny, either. At risk of sounding like a crotchety old man, these are sad times to be living in when 64 MB is considered tiny.
Classic DOS barely took up kilobytes of memory. I think that qualifies as "tiny". Megabytes is downright bloated by comparison. Considering this is written in assembly, what is all that memory used for?
Because I don't have a proper heap yet. And so everything takes up 2 MB pages.
Re: Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
#26This is amazing, good work! Can I ask what references you used to figure out how to write certain pieces of this? There is a torrent of information online, but you've probably got a very good (curated) set of links or books that you recommend.
Well, I've never read a real book about OS development. But I can recommend the OSDev Wiki and Forum, and of course the specifications of everything you need. I've used Intel's Development Manual Volume 3 as reference, as well as ACPI's specification, and some others.
Re: Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
#27Very cool! It (almost) runs on copy.sh V86 emulator: https://copy.sh/v86/ I see the boot process with dots (like linux) and after I have the following message with a red background (if that can help): ExDOS64 version 0.01 built 26.03.2016 ===================================== Boot error: CPU is not 64-bit capable... The last lines of the Javascript console: [CPU ] mode=real/16 paging=0 vm=0 iopl=0 cpl=0 if=1 cs:eip=0…
It clearly says "Boot error: CPU is not 64-bit capable..." which means your CPU is not 64-bit. The V86 emulator doesn't support 64-bit mode and so can't run ExDOS.
Re: Show HN: ExDOS 64-bit version source code release
#28Is it able to run user-created programs? And if so, with what tools?
Not yet, because I am rewriting the multitasking subsystem.