Looking back at MS-DOS 4.00M, or in the beginning before there was OS/2

With the pre-christmas release of the Microsoft OS/2 betas 1.00, 1.01, 1.02, 1.03 & 1.05 on archive.org, and helping Ncommander with an upcoming video, it seemed like a good place to start, not with OS/2 but rather with MS-DOS 4.0.

From the book INSIDE OS/2 ( ISBN 1-55615-117-9 )

Microsoft started work on a multitasking version of MS-DOS in January 1983.  At the time, it was internally called MS-DOS version 3.0. When a new version of the single-tasking MS-DOS was shipped under the name MS-DOS version 3.0, the multitasking version was renamed, internally, to MS-DOS version 4.0. A version of this product–a multitasking, real-mode only MS-DOS–was shipped as MS-DOS version 4.0. Because MS-DOS version 4.0 runs only in real mode, it can run on 8088 and 8086 machines as well as on 80286 machines. The limitations of the real mode environment make MS-DOS version 4.0 a specialized product. Although MS-DOS version 4.0 supports full preemptive multitasking, system memory is limited to the 640 KB available in real mode, with no swapping.2 This means that all processes have to fit into the single 640 KB memory area. Only one MS-DOS version 3.x compatible real mode application can be run; the other processes must be special MS-DOS version 4.0 processes that understand their environment and cooperate with the operating system to coexist peacefully with the single MS-DOS version 3.x real mode application.     

Because of these restrictions, MS-DOS version 4.0 was not intended for general release, but as a platform for specific OEMs to support extended PC architectures. For example, a powerful telephone management system could be built into a PC by using special MS-DOS version 4.0 background processes to control the telephone equipment. The resulting machine could then be marketed as a “compatible MS-DOS 3 PC with a built-in superphone.” Although MS-DOS version 4.0 was released as a special OEM product, the project–now called MS-DOS version 5.0–continued. The goal was to take advantage of the protected mode of the 80286 to provide full general purpose multitasking without the limitations–as seen in MS-DOS version 4.0–of a real-mode only environment. Soon, Microsoft and IBM signed a Joint Development Agreement that provided for the design and development of MS-DOS version 5.0 (now called CP/DOS). The agreement is complex, but it basically provides for joint development and then subsequent joint ownership, with both companies holding full rights to the resulting product.

As the project neared completion, the marketing staffs looked at CP/DOS, nee DOS 5, nee DOS 4, nee DOS 3, and decided that it needed…you guessed it…a name change. As a result, the remainder of this book will discuss the design and function of an operating system called OS/2.

– Inside OS/2.

Although MS-DOS 4.00M disk images have been floating around for quite some time, either a 2 360k disk set, or a single 720k disk image, I don’t think anyone (including me) really tore into it that much. It does have the ability to freeze DOS 3 programs, giving the illusion of running more than one. The session manager is pretty sparse but hitting left alt twice will pop it up giving you the ability to toggle through programs with ease.

MS-DOS 4.00M

There is a FDISK, FORMAT & SYS command making it straight forward to setup a hard disk, and copy the files over, I didn’t see any installer.

there is a PS command to show running processes. Also there is a DOSSIZE to show the memory partitioning and how much is available. Although there is a SWAPPER program I’ve been unable to get it to actually fun.

multitasking!

Another interesting thing if you run the unix ‘strings’ command against all the EXE’s you’ll find the string:

C Library - (C)Copyright Microsoft Corp 1985

Implying that not only was DOS 4.00M a ‘new’ DOS, but it was also written in C. No doubt this contributed to a larger file size than DOS 3, however it would also give that holy grail of portability, at least to new CPU modes. Also many files have the name of the source files baked in such as:

@(#)append.c    1.1 85/10/09
@(#)assign.c    6.1 85/10/23
@(#)attrib.c    6.1 85/10/24
@(#)fdisk.c     1.1 85/10/09
@(#)fddata.c    1.1 85/10/09
@(#)fdlow.c     1.1 85/10/09
@(#)fdsub.c     1.1 85/10/09
@(#)joinsbst.c  6.3 85/11/08
@(#)sysvar.c    6.2 85/11/08
@(#)cds.c       6.2 85/11/08
@(#)dpb.c       6.1 85/11/08
@(#)label.c     6.1 85/10/24
@(#)newdef.y    6.2 85/10/14
@(#)ms4bnr.c    1.1 85/10/15
@(#)mode.c      6.2 85/10/24
@(#)getkey.c    6.1 85/10/25
@(#)pifmes.c    6.1 85/10/25
@(#)advpscrn.c  6.1 85/10/25
@(#)advescrn.c  6.1 85/10/25
@(#)usrscrn.c   6.1 85/10/25
@(#)rangers.c   6.1 85/10/25

Okay so far, so good. But we’ve all seen this before, and scratched this OS about this far, because what else can you do? It’s not like there is any dev tools to do anything fun!

Well the tool hidden in plain sight is LINK4, which in retrospect is specific for MS-DOS 4.00M.

Microsoft (R) 8086 Object Linker  Version 4.01
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1984, 1985.  All rights reserved.

Object Modules [.OBJ]:

There is no SDK for MS-DOS 4.00M, but they were kind enough to leave the linker in place. A quick check of the Windows 1.01 SDK shows that it also includes LINK4:

Microsoft 8086 Object Linker
Version 4.00  (C) Copyright Microsoft Corp 1984, 1985

Object Modules [.OBJ]:

It appears that if the dates and versions are to be trusted they are of the same vintage, but the Windows linker is older, and that they both output to a NE or New Executable. So to start the experiment I created a simple hello world exe from a simple:

void main(){
  printf("Hello from MSC 3\n");
}

To compile this I used Microsoft C 3.0 (more on why later), and used LINK4 to create an EXE:

C:\dos\msc3>cl /c hello.c
Microsoft C Compiler  Version 3.00
(C)Copyright Microsoft Corp 1984 1985
hello.c

C:\dos\msc3>msdos dos4m\link4 hello.OBJ

Microsoft (R) 8086 Object Linker  Version 4.01
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1984, 1985.  All rights reserved.

Run File [HELLO.EXE]:
List File [NUL.MAP]:
Libraries [.LIB]:
Definitions File [NUL.DEF]

Okay, everything looks fine so far. Attempting to run this under MS-DOS just results in the error:

Program too big to fit into memory

Well now that’s odd. Checking the EXE with the Linux ‘file’ command reveals:

file HELLO.EXE
HELLO.EXE: MS-DOS executable, NE (unknown OS 0) (EXE)

So obviously it’s a NE, but it is an older/unknown version to the file map database. There is no stub so I suppose that is why MS-DOS is getting confused.

Now let’s try MS-DOS 4.00M

Hello!

Well now isn’t that interesting?!

Excited with the ability to create special MS-DOS 4.00M programs, I get my favorite vintage ’87 Infocom interpreter, InfoTaskForce 87, and get it building on MSC 3.0. However instead of using the MS-DOS 4.00M linker, I thought I should try to use the Windows 1.01 linker and libraries for the exe:

C:\dos\msc3\infocom>msdos ..\win101sdk\bin\LINK4.EXE @infocom.win.lnk

Microsoft 8086 Object Linker
Version 4.00  (C) Copyright Microsoft Corp 1984, 1985

Object Modules [.OBJ]: FILE.OBJ FUNCS.OBJ INFOCOM.OBJ INIT.OBJ INPUT.OBJ +
Object Modules [.OBJ]: INTERP.OBJ IO.OBJ JUMP.OBJ OBJECT.OBJ OPTIONS.OBJ PAGE.OBJ +
Object Modules [.OBJ]: PRINT.OBJ PROPERTY.OBJ SUPPORT.OBJ VARIABLE.OBJ TERM.OBJ
Run File [FILE.EXE]: INFOCOM.EXE/ALIGN:16
List File [NUL.MAP]: INFOCOM.MAP
Libraries [.LIB]: MWLIBFP MWLIBC/NOD
Definitions File [NUL.DEF] INFOW.DEF;

And for those interested this is my .DEF file:

NAME    Infocom

DESCRIPTION 'Infocom 87 interpreter for Planetfall(83)'

DATA    MULTIPLE


HEAPSIZE    1024        ; Must be non-zero to use Local memory manager
STACKSIZE   4096        ; Must be non-zero for SS == DS
                        ; suggest 4k as minimum stacksize

SEGMENTS
    _INIT   PRELOAD MOVEABLE DISCARDABLE

One thing to save you the horror is that between MS-DOS 2 & 3 the way command line arguments changed. I forget the details but no matter what I tried I was unable to parse the CLI or the environment in this setup. I suppose if I had documentation of the product there would be some hint as to what tools or setup to use. Instead, I took the easy way and hard coded to load Planetfall.

InfoTaskForce compiled with MSC 3.0, using Windows 1.01 libc / LINK4

Unfortunately, this success would prove to be the exception to the rule. I took trek, converted it to K&R C, as Microsoft C 3.00 from 1985 is well. old, and sadly it just won’t run. Likewise, I took Hack 1.03 and although it runs on MS-DOS it will not run on MS-DOS 4.00M. I am sure there is some fundamental reason why it’s not working, and probably tied to creating a proper DEF file. I’m sure it was all written down somewhere but I don’t know. And yes I tried specifying either floating point emulation via library or inline, and it made no difference.

Looking at OS/2 1.00

Loading up the infamous $3,000 OS/2 1.00 beta, and hitting ctrl+escape you are greeted with session manager!

Session Manager for OS/2

Notice the R for real-mode. With the obvious implication that everything else is protected mode. Going one step further on the excellent site pcjs.org there is OS/2 betas SIZZLE and although there is no OS/2 development bits on there, the directory DOS3TOOL reveals that the C compiler for this era for at least MS-DOS is MSC 3.0. Also included is our friend LINK4.

I create a simple def file that contains the single word ‘PROTMODE’ which should give me my OS/2 binary.

So let’s run that through hello world:

msdos sizzle\DOS3TOOL\link4  hello.OBJ,hello,,,hello.def;

Microsoft (R) Segmented-Executable Linker  Version 5.00.21
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1984, 1985, 1986.  All rights reserved.


C:\dos\msc3>

However attempting to run this just crashes amazingly.

Real mode LIBC in Protected mode:

No doubt it’s because the real-mode libc is using interrupt 21 calls, which OS/2 sure wouldn’t like. I’m pretty sure it requires an OS/2 libc that uses DOSCALLS.DLL to function, which I just don’t have any pre-release versions, nor any libc source code to really make it possible. And attempting to port one to OS/2 pre-releases just doesn’t seem so worth the time.

So for the heck of it I point the LIB variable to the OS/2 1.00 SDK’s libs and re-run the link:

C:\dos\msc3>msdos sizzle\DOS3TOOL\link4  hello.OBJ,hello.exe,hello.map,C:\86box\100\x\MSC\LIB\slibc5.lib \86box\100\x\LIB\DOSCALLS.LIB,hello.def;

Microsoft (R) Segmented-Executable Linker  Version 5.00.21
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1984, 1985, 1986.  All rights reserved.

By default it’s trying to link in EM.LIB, SLIBFP.LIB, SLIBC.LIB. Trying to add them all in the command line link just hangs LINK4 maybe a response file is better suited. Anyways:

Hello from MSC 3.0 in protected mode.

It does run on OS/2 1.00, which I guess isn’t surprising as the LINK4 & libraries are from/for this version.

As an interesting note, OS/2 links against doscalls library/DLL to interface to the OS. While MS-DOS 4.00M doesn’t have a seperate DLL, rather it’s baked into IBMDOS.COM

DOSCALLS
ALLOCSEG
REALLOCSEG
FREESEG
LOCKSEG
UNLOCKSEG
GETSEGSIZE
GETDSHANDLE
CRITENTER
CRITLEAVE
FCRITENTER
FCRITLEAVE
PBLOCK
PRUN
SUBSCREEN
GETPIDS
DOSDISCARDCODE
DOSGETHANDLE
DOSHANDLEJUMP

Noticeably absent is file I/O, No doubt allowing programs to use the standard int21 interface to the kernel for file I/O. No doubt this is in its primordial state, as the OS was going to evolve a bit more until it became OS/2. Unfortunately I have no idea how to link or call into this. Without any SDK it’s impossible to say. And even then is developing for a real mode OS worth the effort?

So what have we learned? LINK4, aka the MS-DOS 4.00M Linker, probably should have been called LINKNE for the NE format. Also there is references to it having it’s own virtual memory paging system, and being able to link larger EXE’s than the traditional link command. Sadly I was unable to get any non trivial programs running. I don’t think it was a memory model thing, although the C compiler has issues with InfoTaskForce and the large memory model for some reason, but small & medium work fine. I’d like to think that DOS 4.00M could support massive EXE’s much like Windows 1.01, however despite being from the same company and using the same tools, the memory manager for DOS 4.00M & Windows is fundamentally different.

With all these exiting OS/2 betas now available I’ll have to take some more time to explore them in more detail.

But until then I thought this genesis of DOS 4.00M was worth the look.

Elijah Miller’s NEC v30 on a Pi hat

v30 on a board

While talking about home brew 8080 and 8086 systems on Discord an ebay search brought me to Elijah’s store page where this small little curiosity was up for sale. It’s literally just a NEC v30 on a Raspberry Pi hat, for a mere $15 USD! Interestingly enough the v30 can operate at 3.3v meaning no special hardware is required to interface to the GPIO bus on a Pi. This reminds me so much of the CP/M cartridge for the Commodore 64, and the price being so right I quickly ordered one and eagerly awaited to 2 weeks shipping to Asia.

While I have Pi 4’s that I run Windows 10 on to drive some displays & power point, I wanted to use the slightly faster Pi400 for this. The Pi400 has a compatible GPIO expansion port so just like a cartridge it’s a simple matter of slotting the card, powering up and building the software. While there is an included binary, it’s a 32bit one, and I’m running Manjaro on the Pi400 for a similar look/feel as the PineBook Pro. Anyways the dependences are SDL2, and an odly named ‘wiringPi’ library that allows C programs to interface to the GPIO.

You can download the emulator over on homebrew8088, specifically the Raspberry Pi Second Project. The last ‘ver 2’ download has the project configured for a v30 which is an 8086 analogue, unlike the v20 which is an 8088. When physically interfacing to the processor things like this really matter!

With the emulator built it was pretty simple to fire it up, and boot into MS-DOS:

first boot!

I have to admit I was a little startled at first as I really had no idea if this was going to work at all. I’d spoken to an engineer friend and he was saying plugging a CPU directly into the GPIO bus, and toggling connections to actually emulate the board was both crazy and that without any electrical buffers it’d most likely either fry the processor and maybe the Pi as well. I suspect this being low voltage may be sparing both, although I have no EE so I’m not going to pretend to know.

Loading up Norton SI confirms what Elijah had posted on Ebay is that it runs very slowly about 1/3rd the speed of an XT. Now I may not know anything about hardware but this seemed at least something a profiler could at least tell me what is going on, and if someone like me helicoptering in on the shoulder of giants could see something.

gcc -I/usr/include/SDL2 -pg -O2 *.cpp -o pi -lSDL2 -lwiringPi -lpthread -lstdc++

This will build a profiled version of the emulator that’ll let us know which functions are being called both the number of times, and how much time to do so. Not knowing anything but having profiled other emulators, the usual pattern is that you spend most time fetching and possibly translating memory; Both in feeding instructions and pushing/popping data from stack and pointers. Waiting is usually for initialisation and for IO.

Once you’ve run your profiled executable, it’ll dump a binary file gmon.out which you can then use gprof to format to a text file like this:

gprof pi gmon.out > report.txt

And then looking at the report you can see where the top time, along with top calls are. Some things just take a while to complete and other well they get called far too often.

Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds. % cumulative self self total
time seconds seconds calls s/call s/call name
39.91 0.71 0.71 286883 0.00 0.00 Print_Char_9x16(SDL_Render er*, int, int, unsigned char)
16.30 1.00 0.29 1 0.29 1.02 Start_System_Bus(int)
12.37 1.22 0.22 1100374 0.00 0.00 Data_Bus_Direction_8086_OUT()
7.87 1.36 0.14 5954106 0.00 0.00 CLK()

As expected Start_System_Bus takes 1 second, followed by 1,100,374 calls to set the Data_Bus_Direction_8086_OUT (no doubt the Pi needs to alternate between reading and writing to the CPU), followed by 5,954,106 ticks of the CLK function. Of course the real culprit is Print_Char_9x16 which was called 286,883 times, and is responsible for nearly 40% of the tuntime!

Obviously for a simple MS-DOS boot the screen should not be calling any print char anywhere near this many times. Clearly something is amiss. Not knowing anything I added a simple counter to block at the top of the Print_Char_9x16 function to let it only execute 1:1000 times, and I got this:

Obviously it’s not right, which means that the culprit really isn’t Print_Char_9x16 but rather what is calling it. It was a simple change to each of the Mode functions to only render a fraction of the time, and I changed it to a define to let me fire it more often. This is a simple diff, assuming WordPress doesn’t screw it up. It’s not pretty but it gets the job done.

$ diff -ruN ver2/vga.cpp ver2-j/vga.cpp 
--- ver2/vga.cpp	2020-07-29 10:36:51.000000000 +0800
+++ ver2-j/vga.cpp	2021-06-04 01:51:33.546124473 +0800
@@ -1,5 +1,9 @@
 #include "vga.h"
 
+static int do9x16 = 0;
+#define VIDU 5000
+
+
 void Print_Char_18x16(SDL_Renderer *Renderer, int x, int y, unsigned char Ascii_value)
 {
 	for (int i = 0; i < 9; i++)
@@ -23,6 +27,12 @@
 
 void Mode_0_40x25(SDL_Renderer *Renderer, char* Video_Memory, char* Cursor_Position)
 {
+do9x16++;
+if(do9x16>VIDU)
+        {do9x16=0;}
+else
+        {return;}
+
 	int index = 0; 
 	for (int j = 0; j < 25; j++)
 	{
@@ -36,6 +46,7 @@
 	Print_Char_18x16(Renderer, (Cursor_Position[0] * 18), (Cursor_Position[1] * 16), 0xDB);
 	SDL_RenderPresent(Renderer);	
 }
+
 void Print_Char_9x16(SDL_Renderer *Renderer, int x, int y, unsigned char Ascii_value)
 {
 	for (int i = 0; i < 9; i++)
@@ -57,6 +68,12 @@
 }
 void Mode_2_80x25(SDL_Renderer *Renderer, char* Video_Memory, char* Cursor_Position)
 {
+do9x16++;
+if(do9x16>VIDU)
+        {do9x16=0;}
+else
+        {return;}
+
 	int index = 0; 
 	for (int j = 0; j < 25; j++)
 	{
@@ -102,6 +119,12 @@
 
 void Graphics_Mode_320_200_Palette_0(SDL_Renderer *Renderer, char* Video_Memory)
 {
+do9x16++;
+if(do9x16>VIDU)
+        {do9x16=0;}
+else
+        {return;}
+
 	SDL_RenderClear(Renderer);
 			int index = 0; 				
 			for (int j = 0; j < 100; j++)
@@ -156,6 +179,12 @@
 }
 void Graphics_Mode_320_200_Palette_1(SDL_Renderer *Renderer, char* Video_Memory)
 {
+do9x16++;
+if(do9x16>VIDU)
+        {do9x16=0;}
+else
+        {return;}
+
 	SDL_RenderClear(Renderer);
 			int index = 0; 
 			for (int j = 0; j < 100; j++)

While it feels more responsive on the console, it’s still incredibly slow. SI was returning the same speed which means that although we aren’t hitting the screen anywhere near as often it’s still doing far too much. Is it really a GPIO bus limitation? Again I have no idea. But the next function of course is the clock.

First I tried dividing the usleep in half thinking that maybe it’s not getting called enough. And running SI revealed that I’d gone from a 0.3 to a 0.1! Obviously this is not the desired effect! So instead of a divide I multiplied it by four:

diff -ruN ver2/timer.cpp ver2-j/timer.cpp 
--- ver2/timer.cpp	2020-08-12 00:32:13.000000000 +0800
+++ ver2-j/timer.cpp	2021-06-04 02:06:25.505904407 +0800
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 {
    while(Stop_Flag != true)
    {
-      usleep(54926); 
+      usleep(54926*4); 
       IRQ0();
    }
 }

Now re-running SI I get this:

Norton SI with clock multiplied by four

Now it’s scoring a 1.5! Obviously these are all ‘magic numbers’ and tied to the Pi400 and more importantly I haven’t studied the code at all, I’m not trying to disparage or anything, if anything it’s just a quick example why profiling your code can be so important! At the same time trying to run games is so incredibly slow I don’t even know if my changes had any actual impact to speed as emulation of benchmarks can be such a finickie thing.

My goto game, Battletech 3025 Crescent Hawks Inception loads to the first splash but then seems to hang. I could be impatient or there could be further issues but I’m just some impatient tourist with a C compiler…

With my changes and re-running the profiler I now see this:

Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
  %   cumulative   self              self     total           
 time   seconds   seconds    calls  us/call  us/call  name    
 95.41    129.23   129.23 22696621     5.69     5.69  Read_Memory_Array(unsigned long long, char*, int)
  2.90    133.15     3.92                             Start_System_Bus(int)
  0.88    134.34     1.19 64369074     0.02     0.02  CLK()
  0.30    134.74     0.40                             keyboard()
  0.16    134.96     0.22   412873     0.53     0.53  Print_Char_9x16(SDL_Render
er*, int, int, unsigned char)
  0.08    135.07     0.11 11273939     0.01     0.01  Data_Bus_Direction_8086_OUT()

Which is now what I expect with the bulk of the emulation now calling Read_Memory, with the Clock following that and of course our tamed screen renderer (although its still called far too much!) with the Data_Bus_Direction being further down the list. No doubt some double buffering and checking what changed in between calls would go a LONG way to optimise it, just as would actually studying the source code.

The one cool thing about this is that if I wanted to write a PC emulator this way gives me the confidence that the CPU is not only 100% cycle accurate, but it’s 100% bug for bug accurate since we are using a physical processor.

And again for $15 USD + Shipping I cannot recommend this enough!

Virtualization Challenge IV – QNX 1.2

(This is a guest post by Antoni Sawicki aka Tenox)

This is a Virtualization Challenge. A competition to virtualize an OS inside emulator/hypervisor. (Previously 1 / 2 / 3)

This time the object of the competition is QNX version 1.2. A demo disk is covered here. This is the set of floppy disks:

As you can see the boot disk is copy-protected. As such I have imaged these disks using both KryoFlux and SuperCard Pro. The magnetic flux stream images are available here. For verification I have converted the raw stream of the demo disk in to a sector image using HFE tool. The converted disk boots and works correctly in an emulator. The demo disk can also help with analyzing the boot process since it’s known to work.

The contest is to virtualize the OS, install it and provide a fully working hard disk image with the OS installed. Any emulator of your choice or method is acceptable as long as anyone can download and run it. The prize is $100 via PayPal and of course the fame! ūüôā The winner will be whoever comments the article first with a verifiable working solution.

A bonus $50 prize will be awarded if you can patch the boot floppy disk so that it can be installed as if the copy protection was never there.

Good luck!!!

UPDATE: The competition has ben won: QNX 1.2 Virtualized

UPDATE 2 : QNX 1.2 challenge Act II – HDD Boot

UPDATE 3: Reverse-engineering QNX 1.2 to boot from HDD

QNX 1.1 Demo Disk

(This is a guest post by Antoni Sawicki aka Tenox)

Fresh from the oven, or rather Kryoflux dump – a QNX version 1.1 Demo Disk:

QNX 1.1 Demo Disk

I managed to boot it on 86Box:

QNX 1.1 booted on 86Box Emulator

For the readers with more curiosity and time at their hands please could you try it on different emulators and comment what works and what doesn’t.

For the less curious this how the demo actually looks like once you log in as demo user:

QNX 1.1 Demo Menu

As the authors demand to make as many copies of this disk as possible here it is. Please download and spread!

I also managed to dump the rest of QNX 1.2 including boot disk, utils and even c compiler. Unfortunately the boot disk is copy protected:

I have raw stream dump made with Kryoflux as well as regular disk images. If you are interested in circumventing checking the copy protection so the system could be run in an emulator let me know in a comment. Perhaps time for another Virtualization Challenge?

Previously:

Virtualizing QNX 2

QNX Windows ‚Äď First Look

QNX 2.21 Arrived Today

PCem v15 released!

The new dynamic recompiler appears to be much more faster, although if you want maximum performance, make sure to set your video card to the fastest possible performance.

I was doing my typical DooM thing, and the performance was abysmal. But I did have an 8bit VGA card selected, so what would I really expect? Interestingly enough in ‘low resolution’ mode it performed quite well, but setting it to the artificial ‘fastest PCI/VLB’ speed it was performing just great.

PCem v15 released. Changes from v14 :

  • New machines added – Zenith Data SupersPort, Bull Micral 45, Tulip AT Compact, Amstrad PPC512/640, Packard Bell PB410A, ASUS P/I-P55TVP4, ASUS P/I-P55T2P4, Epox P55-VA, FIC VA-503+
  • New graphics cards added – Image Manager 1024, Sigma Designs Color 400, Trigem Korean VGA
  • Added emulation of AMD K6 family and IDT Winchip 2
  • New CPU recompiler. This provides several optimisations, and the new design allows for greater portability and more scope for optimisation in the future
  • Experimental ARM and ARM64 host support
  • Read-only cassette emulation for IBM PC and PCjr
  • Numerous bug fixes

Thanks to dns2kv2, Greatpsycho, Greg V, John Elliott, Koutakun, leilei, Martin_Riarte, rene, Tale and Tux for contributions towards this release.

As always PCem can be downloaded here:

8086tiny BIOS patch update

This fun patch allows bigger hard disks, allowing you to run larger OS’s like QNX!

You don’t have to update the emulator, it’s just for the BIOS.¬† Source is here: Over on github.

8086 Tiny on Windows with ansicon to render the textmode correctly.

Seeing the QNX logo sure has some flashbacks to the Burroughs/Unisys Icon from days of old.  Although it has no relationship to the Waterloo Icon, some housing complex for students.

PCem v13 released

Lots of new features added into this release!

New systems like:

  • IBM PS/2 Model 50
  • IBM PS/2 Model 55SX
  • IBM PS/2 Model 80

New disk controllers!

  • AT Fixed Disk Adapter
  • DTC 5150X
  • Fixed Disk Adapter (Xebec)
  • IBM ESDI Fixed Disk Controller
  • Western Digital WD1007V-SE1
  • Adaptec AHA-1542C
  • BusLogic BT-545S
  • Longshine LCS-6821N
  • Rancho RT1000B
  • Trantor T130B

And plenty of new fixes!  I just installed Citrix 2.0 with the older OS/2 1.2 based drivers, and it works great!

Citrix 2.0 on PCem v13

The full announcement is here, along with downloads for Windows & Linux.

Epyx Rogue 1.48

Rouge 1.48 title screen

Rouge 1.48 title screen

A while back while looking for old Rogue source, and resources I came across this page, which includes a lot of old versions, and source code, and the file rog11src.zip. But looking at the source in this directory the file rogue.h reveals that it is actually 1.48!

#define REV 1
#define VER 48

And the source is all timestamped from late 1984, and throughout 1985. ¬†Well isn’t that exciting! ¬†Also on the same site is¬†rogue-1.48.zip, a binary distribution of Rogue 1.48. ¬†So I thought I’d give it a shot to build it. ¬†The source mentions needing the MANX C compiler, which of course a quick google search yields an ad:

Manx Aztec C86

Manx Aztec C86

Which has all kinds of fascinating information, such as the ability to cross compile from VAX BSD, or PDP-11 BSD, the Amiga, CP/M etc but they don’t actually give any information about versions.

There is, however an Aztec C museum, that hosts several versions.   And they do have the versions, along with the years to show that the C86 compiler that they had for 1985 would be 3.4b

Version 3.4b
Compiler Aztec C 8086 3.40a 7-3-86
(C) 1982,83,84,85 by Manx Software Systems, Inc.

And conveniently, they do have a download link for the comiler here: az8634b.zip

Now, since I’m on Windows 10 x64 I can’t easily run MS-DOS based compilers from 1985 at my native CLI, without a tool, and I chose¬†Takeda¬†Toshiya’s MSDOS. ¬†I was able to ‘bind’ the azmake utility which then could call the needed compiler, assembler, and linker to build an executable without too much work. ¬†I just created a command file, ‘build.cmd’ in the src directory, to setup the paths and needed variables to quickly compile Rogue from the command line. ¬†And a quick attempt at playing it showed that although it does compile, it is unplayable!

Killed

Killed by the Copy Protection Mafia

Well isn’t that great. ¬†There is a copy protection scheme. ¬†But wait, we have source so can’t we just by pass it? ¬†Yes we can! ¬†In the file dos.asm there is some checks for the variables hit_mul & goodchk. ¬†So I did the logical thing, which is before it checks them I just set them to good values.

; fake copy protection
mov hit_mul_, 1
mov goodchk_, 0D0DH

And the good news is that I would no longer get killed by the Mafia, but I couldn’t progress down any levels. ¬†So in the file¬†oprotec.asm, I saw there is some disk check routine called protect, that I went ahead and bypassed by having it immediately jump down to the ‘good’ label. Everything compiles but it still locks up going down a level. ¬†So finally I check rogue.h and commend the #define PROTECT statement, and now it’ll run!

I don’t know if anyone would even care, but I added the PDF manual and all the zip files that I used to source this version. ¬†You can download it here:

rogue-148_binary+source.7z

If you don’t want to run it under MS-DOS, or something like DOSBox, you can use msdos to run it. ¬†The title screen is garbled as it doesn’t emulate CGA, but as the rest is just text mode, it’ll run just fine.

MS-DOS player can now embed executables

So what this means is that now you can make fully standalone Win32/Win64 executables out of CLI based MS-DOS applications.

D:\tcc>msdos\binary\i486_x64\msdos.exe tcc -Iinclude -Llib hi.c
Turbo C++ Version 3.00 Copyright (c) 1992 Borland International
hi.c:
Turbo Link Version 5.0 Copyright (c) 1992 Borland International

Available memory 4215648

D:\tcc>c:msdos\binary\i486_x64\msdos.exe hi
hi!

D:\tcc>c:msdos\binary\i486_x64\msdos.exe -c hi.exe
‘new_exec_file.exe’ is successfully created

D:\tcc>new_exec_file.exe
hi!

Isn’t that great?

I’ve had one issue with Turbo¬†C++ 3.00 and that is the embedded executable will run out of memory while linking, but invoking it by calling msdos.exe let’s it run fine. If you compile and link separately it’ll run just fine.

As always you can find the project page here:

http://takeda-toshiya.my.coocan.jp/msdos/index.html

 

 

 

As requested, PCem v11 with networking

via SLiRP

via SLiRP

injecting networking was no more difficult than it was in version 10. ¬†It’s only a few changes to pc.c, if you look at the USENETWORKING define you’ll see them. ¬†The best notes are on the forum.

I haven’t changed or improved anything it still requires manual configuration.

Downloads are available on my site as¬†pcem_v11_networking.7z. ¬†You’ll have to defeat the password protection, as always. ¬†I included the source, it ought to be trivial to rebuild.

*For anyone using an old version the ‘nvr’ directory is missing, so PC-em is unable to create new non volatile ram save files, meaning you always loose your BIOS settings. ¬†Sorry I missed that one.