Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Stas Sergeev]

Hello.

Ryan Underwood wrote:
> Ryans Todo List: - slowdown kludges - document telnetting to dosemu
> application on inetd - update Win3.11-DOSEMU HOWTO
> What are some other stuff that needs to be worked on
Yes, as the work on 1.2-stable branch is
started, the doc updates are rather important
I think. Good that you took the Win3.11 part,
I am removing it from my "to-do for 1.2" then.
Any other doc updates might also be appreciated.

>> "seen".  I grepped through the docs for "lexer" and "parser" but 
>> didn't see much useful right away. 
>  I take it from lack of response that nobody knows? :)
No, it is just that without a detailed description,
without showing your changes and without any info
at all, asking for the hints is a sure way to be
left unanswered:) (and you can find an examples of
such a patches everywhere around)

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Bart Oldeman]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Stas Sergeev wrote:

> Any other doc updates might also be appreciated.

this is always true.

As to elaborate to what Stas said the CVS tree in sourceforge contains a
Release-1_2 branch which contains what should become 1.2.0. That's
essentially 1.1.5.7 with some NPTL and DPMI fixes but with some
experimental stuff removed (LFNs, unicode translations for filenames,
bitmap fonts for text modes and GPM mouse support aren't there, but they
could later be backported to 1.2.1 after getting some more testing done
and bugs fixed).

This code builds and seems to work well for me and I'll put up a 1.2.0rc1
(version code "1.1.99.1") soon; just need to sort out some FreeDOS stuff
since I'll also put up binaries which will need to work out of the box.

Between 1.2.0rc1 and 1.2.0 there should only be release critical bug fixes
and documentation updates.

Hence there will be no 1.1.5.8 but that will be 1.3.0.

BTW: Also thanks to Ryan's dosemu.conf generator web page I could already
clarify a few comments and reorganized dosemu.conf (like this):

[...]

##############################################################################
## Keyboard related settings

# Keyboard layout: default: 'auto' (which tries to generate the table from
# the current Linux console settings)
# or one of: finnish(-latin1), de(-latin1), be, it, us, uk, dk(-latin1),
# keyb-no, no-latin1, dvorak, pl, po, sg(-latin1), fr(-latin1), sf(-latin1),
# es(-latin1), sw, hu(-latin2), hu-cwi, keyb-user, hr-cp852, hr-latin2,
# cz-qwerty, cz-qwertz, ru, tr.

# $_layout = "auto"

# bypass normal keyboard input on the Linux console, maybe dangerous

# $_rawkeyboard = (0)

# 30 == Ctrl-^ (Ctrl-6 on US keyboards), special-sequence prefix for terminals
# use Ctrl-^ h for help

# $_escchar = (30)

##############################################################################
## Mouse settings (console only, ignored for remote/xterm/xdosemu!)

# type: one of microsoft, mousesystems, logitech, mmseries, mouseman, hitachi,
# busmouse, ps2, imps2. Default: "" (no mouse or serial mouse via DOS driver)

# $_mouse = ""

[...]

to answer some more questions:

   emuini ____________________
   Extension for the system.ini file to load, if you want to use something besides the
   default. (FIXME -- wtf is this for?)

that's for Windows 3.x

   hardware_ram ____________________
   Enter a list of segment values and/or ranges of memory that you would
   like mapped from physical memory to the DOSEMU address space. This is
   useful for accessing memory of ISA cards for instance. (FIXME - I think)

essentially yes, it's like the direct video RAM access you can get on the
console.

   X_mode13fact ____________________ (0-)
   FIXME I know not what this does

this is set by default to (2). It means that any graphical DOS application
that uses the 320x200 resolution will use a 640x400 (2x sized) window,
so pixels become 2x2 blocks (unless you use one of the filtering options).

   X_winsize ____________________
   This can be set to an x,y values if you wish to specify the pixel size
   of the initial X11 window. FIXME: what does "defaults to float" mean?

This means that it depends on the resolution of the video mode that the
DOS application sets. Essentially you can arbitrarily rescale the "dos in
a box" in graphics mode. You can set X_winsize to, say, "424, 123" to get
a 424x123 window for all graphical DOS apps.

Bart

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 12:42:29AM +0100, Bart Oldeman wrote:
> 
> BTW: Also thanks to Ryan's dosemu.conf generator web page I could already
> clarify a few comments and reorganized dosemu.conf (like this):a

Something I forgot to ask -- is there any difference to the parser
whether the dosemu.conf options is enclosed in "" or in () ?

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:22:14PM +0400, Stas Sergeev wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> Ryan Underwood wrote:
> >Ryans Todo List: - slowdown kludges - document telnetting to dosemu
> >application on inetd - update Win3.11-DOSEMU HOWTO
> >What are some other stuff that needs to be worked on
> Yes, as the work on 1.2-stable branch is
> started, the doc updates are rather important
> I think. Good that you took the Win3.11 part,
> I am removing it from my "to-do for 1.2" then.
> Any other doc updates might also be appreciated.

Sure, I'll take a look through depending on the time I have.

> >>"seen".  I grepped through the docs for "lexer" and "parser" but 
> >>didn't see much useful right away. 
> > I take it from lack of response that nobody knows? :)
> No, it is just that without a detailed description,
> without showing your changes and without any info
> at all, asking for the hints is a sure way to be
> left unanswered:) (and you can find an examples of
> such a patches everywhere around)

Is it really unreasonable to simply ask "Is there an existing
documentation that points out how to do this" before going into
excessive detail about the issue and wasting everyone's bandwidth?  I
think not, but perhaps one could disagree with that...

-- 
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?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hmm,

Seems 1.1.5.7 no longer works with -pre4 either.

When running any dosemu command (such as lredir, exitemu, etc):
ERROR: lowmem_alloc failed for 10240
ERROR: Unable to allocate memory pool

Anyone know what is going on?

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Bart Oldeman]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Ryan Underwood wrote:

>
> Seems 1.1.5.7 no longer works with -pre4 either.
>
> When running any dosemu command (such as lredir, exitemu, etc):
> ERROR: lowmem_alloc failed for 10240
> ERROR: Unable to allocate memory pool
>
> Anyone know what is going on?

you forgot to update lredir.com and friends. Don't worry, the new versions
are backwards compatible.

Bart

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi Bart,

On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 10:12:47AM +0100, Bart Oldeman wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> 
> >
> > Seems 1.1.5.7 no longer works with -pre4 either.
> >
> > When running any dosemu command (such as lredir, exitemu, etc):
> > ERROR: lowmem_alloc failed for 10240
> > ERROR: Unable to allocate memory pool
> >
> > Anyone know what is going on?
> 
> you forgot to update lredir.com and friends. Don't worry, the new versions
> are backwards compatible.

Yep, I just discovered that too. thanks.

Back to hacking...

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

While on the topic, is there a document that explains how to add a new
configuration option?  I have modified, parser.y, config.c, global.conf,
and lexer.l and having a little trouble getting the new variable to be
"seen".  I grepped through the docs for "lexer" and "parser" but didn't
see much useful right away.

Thanks,

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 04:33:50AM -0500, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> While on the topic, is there a document that explains how to add a new
> configuration option?  I have modified, parser.y, config.c, global.conf,
> and lexer.l and having a little trouble getting the new variable to be
> "seen".  I grepped through the docs for "lexer" and "parser" but didn't
> see much useful right away.

I take it from lack of response that nobody knows? :)

Just kidding, but I really have some problems implementing a new
configuration option, so any hints would be helpful.

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Bart Oldeman]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Ryan Underwood wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 04:33:50AM -0500, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> >
> > While on the topic, is there a document that explains how to add a new
> > configuration option?  I have modified, parser.y, config.c, global.conf,
> > and lexer.l and having a little trouble getting the new variable to be
> > "seen".  I grepped through the docs for "lexer" and "parser" but didn't
> > see much useful right away.
>
> I take it from lack of response that nobody knows? :)
>
> Just kidding, but I really have some problems implementing a new
> configuration option, so any hints would be helpful.

have a look at a small prepatch that does exactly that, eg. patch-1.1.5.5
added a $_lfn_support option.

Bart

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:52:41PM +0100, Bart Oldeman wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 04:33:50AM -0500, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> > >
> > > While on the topic, is there a document that explains how to add a new
> > > configuration option?  I have modified, parser.y, config.c, global.conf,
> > > and lexer.l and having a little trouble getting the new variable to be
> > > "seen".  I grepped through the docs for "lexer" and "parser" but didn't
> > > see much useful right away.
> >
> > I take it from lack of response that nobody knows? :)
> >
> > Just kidding, but I really have some problems implementing a new
> > configuration option, so any hints would be helpful.
> 
> have a look at a small prepatch that does exactly that, eg. patch-1.1.5.5
> added a $_lfn_support option.

Thanks for the pointer.  I still don't see what I missed now, but that
will help track it down.

Ryans Todo List:
- slowdown kludges
- document telnetting to dosemu application on inetd
- update Win3.11-DOSEMU HOWTO
- libsynthchip for OPL emulation at least
- dos emulator compatibility/regression database
- ALSA driver for sound/midi

By the way I also patched the Synchronet BBS software for DOSEMU
integration -- the result can be found at:
http://forge.icequake.net/syncmods

What are some other stuff that needs to be worked on that a DOS guy but
not DOS guru can do?

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

Hi,

On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:52:41PM +0100, Bart Oldeman wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 04:33:50AM -0500, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> > >
> > > While on the topic, is there a document that explains how to add a new
> > > configuration option?  I have modified, parser.y, config.c, global.conf,
> > > and lexer.l and having a little trouble getting the new variable to be
> > > "seen".  I grepped through the docs for "lexer" and "parser" but didn't
> > > see much useful right away.
> >
> > I take it from lack of response that nobody knows? :)
> >
> > Just kidding, but I really have some problems implementing a new
> > configuration option, so any hints would be helpful.
> 
> have a look at a small prepatch that does exactly that, eg. patch-1.1.5.5
> added a $_lfn_support option.

Here is the procedure I undertook, to hopefully shed some more light:

1. First I added a new variable to the config struct in
src/include/emu.h called delay_interval

2. in src/base/init/lexer.l.in:
delay_interval          RETURN(DELAY_INTERVAL);

3. in src/base/init/parser.y.in:
%token DELAY_INTERVAL

4. in src/base/init/parser.y.in also:
	| DELAY_INTERVAL expression
		{
		c_printf("Hello, this is delay_interval speaking\n");
		}

5. in global.conf, under checkuservar, I add $_delay_interval.
In the parser_version_3 scope, I add:
delay_interval $_delay_intervala

6. in dosemu.conf on my system, I add $_delay_interval = (1234)

7. I run the new dosemu.bin -D+C, and my c_printf is never displayed.

Any ideas?

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Ryan Underwood]

On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 11:26:54PM -0500, Ryan Underwood wrote:
> 
> 5. in global.conf, under checkuservar, I add $_delay_interval.
> In the parser_version_3 scope, I add:
> delay_interval $_delay_intervala
                            -----^
Obviously, a typo.

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

Re: 1.0.2.1 and latest kernel?a [1.1.5.7 now]

[Bart Oldeman]

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Ryan Underwood wrote:

> Here is the procedure I undertook, to hopefully shed some more light:
>
> 1. First I added a new variable to the config struct in
> src/include/emu.h called delay_interval
>
> 2. in src/base/init/lexer.l.in:
> delay_interval          RETURN(DELAY_INTERVAL);
>
> 3. in src/base/init/parser.y.in:
> %token DELAY_INTERVAL
>
> 4. in src/base/init/parser.y.in also:
> 	| DELAY_INTERVAL expression
> 		{
> 		c_printf("Hello, this is delay_interval speaking\n");
> 		}
>
> 5. in global.conf, under checkuservar, I add $_delay_interval.
> In the parser_version_3 scope, I add:
> delay_interval $_delay_intervala
>
> 6. in dosemu.conf on my system, I add $_delay_interval = (1234)
>
> 7. I run the new dosemu.bin -D+C, and my c_printf is never displayed.
>
> Any ideas?

sounds about right; maybe there's something obscure. Try a "warn" in
global.conf, and the options
-h2 -D+cw -O
(not -D+C but small c) for some more clues. Also _delay_interval should
show up in "unix set" and "system set" typed from the DOS prompt.

The difference between () and "" is in global.conf. Numbers from ()
you can add, multiply, compare and so on; on strings you can use strlen
and so on. See also README-tech.txt.

Bart