I've already had the new kernel successfully probe the entire 2 GB in my
VM. And that's not even with PAE added in yet.
On 9/24/2015 9:23 PM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU wrote:
Also,perhaps we should allow our new OS to "see" more RAM and
memory.FreeDOS/DOS only "sees" a specific amount of RAM.I could have
5GB of RAM,and it will only read 1MB,and so on with the computer cores.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:21 PM, JAYDEN CHARBONNEAU
<jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org <mailto:jcharbonnea...@cpsge.org>> wrote:
First thing I noticed (This may be just me.),is that we need more
memory for the OS environment.Normally,when I boot FreeDOS on ANY
computer (Be it modern or old),the memory is always 601 MB
free.More memory would be needed for a bigger file system and
multi-tasking.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Eric Auer <e.a...@jpberlin.de
<mailto:e.a...@jpberlin.de>> wrote:
Hi Mercury,
so you want to run a NAS or home automation on DOS?
For NAS, you need a multitasking OS, not DOS. For
home automation, which limitation of FAT would be
a problem? Same for other light embedded devices.
Flash does not give good performance for FAT, but
embedded devices would have been free to use one
of many available Linux filesystems. But did not.
Of course the question can be extended: What if an
existing nicer-than-FAT filesystem is used more in
DOS? Have a look at what already EXISTS for Linux,
then have a look at the source code to check which
filesystems are 1. simple enough to make a "light"
DOS driver possible (some might even be so simple
that booting DOS from them is feasible, but only a
really popular filesystem may get kernel drivers),
2. better than FAT in some way (e.g. more speed on
flash storage, better space allocation or LFN in a
less insane way than VFAT) but 3. not putting lots
of code into features which mean nothing for DOS,
such as ACL based file permissions or extreme file
or disk size support beyond existing FAT32 API or
"network redirector" API expressible number range.
Looking forward to your review of existing FS-es!
Of course with an outlook towards which properties
a not-yet-existing FS could have to be even nicer
for use within a DOS based storage "ecosystem".
Cheers, Eric
PS: By "light", I mean a driver which is not 100s
of kilobytes in size and which can be fast with a
bit of DOS RAM and XMS instead of needing 500 MB
of DPMI RAM and protected mode implementation :-)
> NAS devices, home automation computers and other similar
devices are
> becoming increasingly common, and offering a filesystem
finally capable
> of handling the sizes of modern hard drives could be a welcome
> improvement for them, and just may help get FreeDOS used in
a wider market.
>
> How do we know this isn't a chicken-and-egg problem? Maybe
all the
> devices only use the proprietary exFAT because there was no open
> alternative. Maybe, had there been one available, we would
all...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
