Comments on: Linux 0.00 & 0.11 on Qemu!

By: Maxime

Maxime — Sat, 27 Aug 2016 17:49:24 +0000

In reply to Andre Da Costa.

Have a look on win3x.org, this is a wonderful forum: http://www.win3x.org/win3board/viewforum.php?f=34

By: neozeed

neozeed — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:34:34 +0000

In reply to Roy. you should pass that on to the oldlinux guys.. I'm sure they'd be thrilled!

By: Roy

Roy — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 07:51:35 +0000

In reply to Roy. /me end up fixing atof.o in libc.a using no floating point literals and recompile gcc 1.42 ;)

By: Roy

Roy — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:06:35 +0000

I tried compiling something that need “float” type in Linux 0.11, and found that gcc mess up the floating points.

By: Neozeed

Neozeed — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:35:33 +0000

It certainly 'felt' faster as there was less driver contentions, but it still used the same PCI/ISA bus as the PC's....

I know my old Dec Alpha would take a minute or two to go through the BIOS, but once NT had loaded only a few seconds to bring up the logon prompt.

I think the bus chips may have been a big deal, but ironically the C compilers for the Dec Alpha SUCKED... badly.

only until Visual C++ 6.0 could you actually use it to build 'release' binaries, and of course then they killed it.

By: Raijinzrael

Raijinzrael — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:29:48 +0000

And how to fast is the NT Alpha port in real hardware?

I'm very interested in OS internals, virtualization & hardware in generally, but in Mexico does not exist a place to learn all those U_U..

By: Neozeed

Neozeed — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 21:04:51 +0000

I've only used the Dec Alpha NT on physical hardware (still have one!!) and in Qemu the MIPS version will run… I use it's NT 4.0 / VC 4 from time to time.

By: Raijinzrael

Raijinzrael — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 19:59:48 +0000

But Cutler design was only slow in X86 platform. As you can see, in RISC type architectures, Windows NT "flies" literally... For x86 port 45% of code were hacks made in assembly language to make NT go as fast as possible for these older machines, & with that all, NT in 386-Pentium Uniprocessor machines was terribly slow, those hacks only made sense with the advent of PII processor generation (In PII & subsequent processor generations Windows NT flies literally, and is a good OS for guest VMs, unlike OS/2)...

In all other Windows NT ports, those type of hacks were almost nonexistent, and assembly code only appears in the HAL.

Thinking in all of this, I wonder the ReactOS attempt to recreate all this so complex OS with a so tiny develop team...

By: Neozeed

Neozeed — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 19:34:16 +0000

Somewhere they have screen shots of the Microsoft Beta of OS/2 2.0, and the MS-DOS session configuration looks almost identical to the MS-DOS configuration from Windows 95…

Yeah there was a bit of technology mixed around on the x86 space as Cutlers original design proved to be too slow… Although NT 3.1 flies on 1Ghz++ machines… .lol

By: Raijinzrael

Raijinzrael — Thu, 19 Aug 2010 19:01:23 +0000

Hey Neozeed, you know that Windows 3.x & the latest releases of DOS had OS/2 components?

I'm read a little of Show Stopper! book in Google Books, very interesting piece of history, I'm recommend this book as well.

Another interesting book with a lot of history: "Andrew Schulman - DOS Undocumented"