1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?

1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

I just installed a new kernel, 2.4.23-pre4, and DOSEMU stable version
1.0.2.1 stopped working.  I have tried to boot freedos and msdos, and
both of them crash DOSEMU early in the boot process with strange errors.

Can anyone else duplicate this problem?

-- 
Ryan Underwood, <nemesis at icequake.net>, icq=10317253

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?

[Stas Sergeev]

Hello.

Ryan Underwood wrote:
> I just installed a new kernel, 2.4.23-pre4, and DOSEMU stable version
> 1.0.2.1 stopped working.
<offtopic>
May I just suggest you a better way of
spending your free time? :)
There is another dos emulator there, called
DosBox (was already popped up on that list
recently). It seems to have a rather complete
DPMI support, including the undocumented
"MS-DOS" extension, which means it is intended
to run the programs like bcc and winos2, which
was a "secret weapon" of dosemu for years.
Their DPMI source code looks very clean and promising:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/dosbox/dosbox/src/ints/dpmi.cpp?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/plain
but I am wondering if it really exceeds dosemu
as it claims to be (which is deserved anyway).
So, as you seem to have some spare time left
(otherwise why would you start fiddling with
1.0.2?:), it would be very nice if you try
how good is DosBox's DPMI support compared to
the one of dosemu (but not 1.0.2) and let us
know.
</offtopic>

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 07:29:03AM +0400, Stas Sergeev wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> Ryan Underwood wrote:
> >I just installed a new kernel, 2.4.23-pre4, and DOSEMU stable version
> >1.0.2.1 stopped working.
> <offtopic>
> May I just suggest you a better way of
> spending your free time? :)

There was a request that I post the details of how to work DOSEMU
through an inetd connection.  I couldn't get my old method to work with the
latest version, so I was trying the stable version, which I was sure had
worked at soem point.  However, it doesn't seem to work anymore on the
new kernel :(

> There is another dos emulator there, called
> DosBox (was already popped up on that list
> recently). It seems to have a rather complete
> DPMI support, including the undocumented
> "MS-DOS" extension, which means it is intended
> to run the programs like bcc and winos2, which
> was a "secret weapon" of dosemu for years.
> Their DPMI source code looks very clean and promising:
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/dosbox/dosbox/src/ints/dpmi.cpp?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/plain
> but I am wondering if it really exceeds dosemu
> as it claims to be (which is deserved anyway).

Ok, I will take a look at it.  In the meantime, I really would like to
know if anyone gets 1.0.2.1 to work with the latest kernel, and the
precise kernel version which broke it would be helpful.


-- 
Ryan Underwood, <nemesis at icequake.net>, icq=10317253

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?

[Stas Sergeev]

Hello.

Ryan Underwood wrote:
> There was a request that I post the details of how to work DOSEMU 
> through an inetd connection.  I couldn't get my old method to work
>  with the latest version, so I was trying the stable version, which
>  I was sure had worked at soem point.
OK, I see.
You can't get that working on the recent
dosemu because that was explicitly prohibited
in the parser.
But please have a look into a parser.y:1314
of dosemu 1.0.2. strcpy(sptr->dev, ttyname(0))
is there and should segfault when the FD 0
is referring not to a tty and the virtual modem
is attempted to be used on it.

> In the meantime, I really would like to know if anyone gets 1.0.2.1
> to work with the latest kernel, and the precise kernel version
> which broke it would be helpful.
I've heard about a major changes done in 2.4
kernels recently, mostly VM-related. It would
be good to figure out what was broken, but
perhaps the things are just not settled down
yet after that changes.