Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open Sourcing DOS 4

hanselman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 382 posts

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#71

Post by somat »

actionfromafar wrote: post #9
Scaevolus wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there specific parts of the DOS API that existing emulators like DOSBOX don't handle accurately enough? I don't understand if this source can be usefully integrated into modern DOS preservation projects.

It was a long time since I messed with things, but "net drives" something didn't work in FreeDOS a long time ago. This was useful, because it meant you could from within a PC emulator access your host file system. It's entirely possible that works on FreeDOS now.

This is almost completely unrelated to your comment, but it sparked a fun memory. At one point I had a system set up that would boot dos via ipxe with iscsi drives. I thought it was almost magical how dos had no clue it was using a network drive. I still don't know exactly how it worked. but I suspect ipxe was patching the bios.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#72

Post by conkeisterdoor »

It looks like "brain damaged" was the developer's go-to insult when frustrated :D

2024-04-25 19:35 ~/sort/dl/MS-DOS % grep -nri 'brain[ -]damage' .

./v4.0/src/DOS/STRIN.ASM:70:; Brain-damaged TP ignored ^F in case his BIOS did not flush the

./v4.0/src/DOS/PATH.ASM:24:; MZ 19 Jan 1983 Brain damaged applications rely on success

./v4.0/src/DOS/FCBIO.ASM:28:; MZ 15 Dec 1983 Brain damaged programs close FCBs multiple

./v4.0/src/DOS/FCBIO2.ASM:28:; MZ 15 Dec 1983 Brain damaged programs close FCBs multiple

./v4.0/src/BIOS/MSBIO1.ASM:82:; REV 2.15 7/13/83 ARR BECAUSE IBM IS FUNDAMENTALY BRAIN DAMAGED, AND

./v4.0/src/CMD/PRINT/PRINT_R.ASM:1772: ; See if brain damaged user entered

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#73

Post by moody__ »

I appreciate the work in getting this open sourced but I find it telling that this had to be done through an outside motivator. There seems to be no internal "ticking clock" to get some of these things out in to the open. That's fine no one is owed the source code for this stuff or anything, but it would be nice if there was more interest on the side of the companies to get some of their formative history out so people can learn from it.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#74

Post by wormius »

zdimension wrote: post #32

https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/blob/2d04cacc5322951f187... > ; REV 2.15 7/13/83 ARR BECAUSE IBM IS FUNDAMENTALY BRAIN DAMAGED, AND Someone was angry that day. Wonder if any IBM dev ever stumbled upon this when MS and IBM worked together.

It's what happens after Ballmer exceeds the peak.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#75

Post by elwell »

freedomben wrote: post #67
zdimension wrote: post #32

https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/blob/2d04cacc5322951f187... > ; REV 2.15 7/13/83 ARR BECAUSE IBM IS FUNDAMENTALY BRAIN DAMAGED, AND Someone was angry that day. Wonder if any IBM dev ever stumbled upon this when MS and IBM worked together.

This was the good 'ol days, back when you could put stuff in comments like that and not worry about legal

Now you can't even say "sanity check", much less mention brain damage.

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#77

Post by blobbers »

conkeisterdoor wrote: post #72

It looks like "brain damaged" was the developer's go-to insult when frustrated :D 2024-04-25 19:35 ~/sort/dl/MS-DOS % grep -nri 'brain[ -]damage' . ./v4.0/src/DOS/STRIN.ASM:70:; Brain-damaged TP ignored ^F in case his BIOS did not flush the ./v4.0/src/DOS/PATH.ASM:24:; MZ 19 Jan 1983 Brain damaged applications rely on success ./v4.0/src/DOS/FCBIO.ASM:28:; MZ 15 Dec 1983 Brain damaged programs close FCBs multiple ./v4…

Let's bring back those DOS 4.0 period sayings.

Does this mean if you happen to be talking to BillG you could talk about brain damaged programs and he'd nod appreciatively?

Re: Open Sourcing DOS 4

#79

Post by 486sx33 »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #56
optimalquiet wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows 2000 was part of the professional NT line, though, and was the companion of Me for the millennium releases. As far as I know, 2000 wasn't marketed to home users. I think what the comment you replied to is saying is the the transition away from DOS wasn't completed for both professional and home markets until XP, which unified everything under NT for all markets.

this is accurate; the 2000 line targeted business, and if you remember having a consumer computer with 2000 pro it didn't support a lot of hardware.

Nice part of that pain came when XP was released. Win 2000 drivers mostly all happily loaded into Win XP !
Post reply on HN