Index
> OS Construction > BootloaderGoto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
| Author |
|
|
DataHunter2009 13 Aug 2005, 01:47
I have to admit, I went a bit far. But in the end, I got my point across.
 |
|||
13 Aug 2005, 01:47 |
|
|
Night Rider 13 Aug 2005, 13:42
Maybe they mean operating surround, not system?
|
|||
|
13 Aug 2005, 13:42 |
|
|
Night Rider 13 Aug 2005, 13:43
"You know what that does? Do ya Do ya? NO! You don't! I'll tell you... " \Let's get'em! Yeah!!!!!
|
|||
|
13 Aug 2005, 13:43 |
|
|
THEWizardGenius 14 Aug 2005, 18:09
lol, how stupid. I love arguing too
|
|||
|
14 Aug 2005, 18:09 |
|
|
THEWizardGenius 14 Aug 2005, 18:23
_________________ FASM Rules! OS Dev is fun! Pepsi tastes nasty! Some ants toot! It's over! |
|||
|
14 Aug 2005, 18:23 |
|
|
DataHunter2009 14 Aug 2005, 19:19
Yeah. I was looking over that too. It's amazing how kids can have such large imaginations.
|
|||
|
14 Aug 2005, 19:19 |
|
|
THEWizardGenius 14 Aug 2005, 20:14
I flamed the h311 out of them in the Forum Rules subforum of http://www.subosdev.tk/ . They had no other subforums specifically for flaming (they should, they probably get at least 3 billion flames per day
 ) so that's where I posted. I tried to be nice, but in the end I decided to tell them how stupid the SubOSes are.
Well, they asked for it  _________________ FASM Rules! OS Dev is fun! Pepsi tastes nasty! Some ants toot! It's over! |
|||
|
14 Aug 2005, 20:14 |
|
|
DataHunter2009 14 Aug 2005, 23:03
lol. I was the guy who replied.
Maybe we can get 'em to close down... if we make 'em mad enough. lol. |
|||
|
14 Aug 2005, 23:03 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 14 Aug 2005, 23:25
I don't see any point in flaming them - if they learn more they will notice themselves why the things they were doing were "weird". However at their current level they may still learn a lot even from what appears to you as stupid and useless. Well, they may also never learn any programming advanced enough to get out of this "niche", but instead of flaming, it would be actually wiser to try to lead them in the direction of learning more. And paradoxically in the beginning it might even mean helping them in writing those projects, that appear so stupid to you. And if you are not able to help them without offending them, it's better to use this time for your own work, hoping there will be some people able to appreciate it.
|
|||
|
14 Aug 2005, 23:25 |
|
|
smiddy 15 Aug 2005, 00:09
Tomasz Grysztar wrote: I don't see any point in flaming them - if they learn more they will notice themselves why the things they were doing were "weird". However at their current level they may still learn a lot even from what appears to you as stupid and useless. Well, they may also never learn any programming advanced enough to get out of this "niche", but instead of flaming, it would be actually wiser to try to lead them in the direction of learning more. And paradoxically in the beginning it might even mean helping them in writing those projects, that appear so stupid to you. And if you are not able to help them without offending them, it's better to use this time for your own work, hoping there will be some people able to appreciate it. You never cease to amaze me, well said!  |
|||
|
15 Aug 2005, 00:09 |
|
|
DataHunter2009 15 Aug 2005, 00:15
Actually... when you put it that way, I kinda see what you mean...
|
|||
|
15 Aug 2005, 00:15 |
|
|
THEWizardGenius 16 Aug 2005, 02:14
Good point... it looks really stupid, but maybe they think we're stupid, for saying it's stupid...
|
|||
|
16 Aug 2005, 02:14 |
|
|
DataHunter2009 16 Aug 2005, 16:22
Yeah... but what breed of idiot calls a programmer stupid when we can do much more than they can? That's just crazy.
|
|||
|
16 Aug 2005, 16:22 |
|
|
shoorick 16 Aug 2005, 21:22
hi guys! excuse me for offtop: so, when we will start to write bootloader?
by the way, i just wrote something: this loaders just load itself 512 bytes later and prints string from there. although there are many ready sources i try to exercise and use only my old techhelp to do this. so, you can try it also. (do not say it is best, just works  )
----------------- well first error was of wrong usage of qemu: i've been passing image as hda (was enough to load boot sector) - now as fda, and then was disk error because i did not used passed drive number - but hard zero, and could not recognize error cause i've been printing al while error code returns in ah - this fixed 
_________________ UNICODE forever! Last edited by shoorick on 17 Aug 2005, 12:53; edited 2 times in total |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
16 Aug 2005, 21:22 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
shoorick 17 Aug 2005, 00:19
oh, i already found there errors, but will fix them next time
- done |
|||
|
17 Aug 2005, 00:19 |
|
|
bubach 22 Aug 2005, 07:22
About my bootsector, the FAT12 loading is a bit slow, and maybe unstable.
My current bootsector have FAT12 code (fast and working) by John Fine. Maybe I should add pmode and a20 to that one and post it for you? (since I do not longer have the need of going into pmode or setting a20 in the bootloader myself) / Christoffer |
|||
|
22 Aug 2005, 07:22 |
|
|
THEWizardGenius 22 Aug 2005, 14:52
If you wouldn't mind, that would be nice. However, I may go back to using a real mode bootloader so I can detect installed memory and things like that, from the kernel.
|
|||
|
22 Aug 2005, 14:52 |
|
|
tom tobias 22 Aug 2005, 23:03
Sorry for my confusion: are you writing to suggest that one cannot examine "installed memory and things like that" FROM PROTECTED MODE?
 |
|||
|
22 Aug 2005, 23:03 |
|
|
bubach 28 Aug 2005, 17:00
No, thats why he wrote a "real mode bootloader" which means that the kernel would start in realmode.
[EDIT] i thought you said "can" instead of "cannot" Last edited by bubach on 29 Aug 2005, 06:46; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
28 Aug 2005, 17:00 |
|
| Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|