Re: [Freedos-user] LBA

> GPT support? Do people also work on UEFI integration? ;-) GPT support is actually easy; just less then 100 lines in the disk initialisation. In contrast, UEFI would be hard. Really hard. Hpwever not impossible. > (That would be *mad*, if only for the cool factor. > Except that many DOS apps wou

Re: [Freedos-user] LBA

GPT support? Do people also work on UEFI integration? ;-) (That would be *mad*, if only for the cool factor. Except that many DOS apps would fail to work, due to the missing legacy BIOS services, also not sure how far the CPU real mode would be feasible under 64bit UEFI etc. Sounds moot.) Frank

Re: [Freedos-user] LBA

Hi! While there is a hardware difference in how you control more than 2^28 sectors (128 GB) FreeDOS is only limited by the BIOS LBA support and at the moment by MBR partitioning, which is limited to 2 TB disk size. However, people have already been working on GPT partitioning support :-) Eric

Re: [Freedos-user] LBA

FreeDOS supports Logical Block Addressing for hard disks up to 128 GB or even 2TB depending on the BIOS used However, some BIOSes might have bugs for disks larger than 32 GB, but you could use drivers like OnTrack or EzDrive to help resolve this issue On Fri, 10 Jan 2025, 11:18 Michał Dec via Free

[Freedos-user] LBA

Hello everyone, What is the size of LBA supported by FreeDOS? I'm asking because I have a PC with 7 CF slots and I want to know if I can put FreeDOS on a 256GB card or do I have to limit that OS to 128GB. Best regards, Michał Dec ___ Freedos-use

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Louis Santillan wrote: > > With all this talk of really old NTs, is there a reason ReactOS wouldn't > work for some of you? I don't use "really old NTs". Outside of Jack, I don't recall anyone else saying they use such a version. If it works for him, good, "ju

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Sun, 08 Dec 2013 17:13:29 -0500, Rugxulo wrote: > >> It supports FAT12/16 and NTFS out of the box, and >> with a patched system file it will support FAT32 also (same goes for >> NT3.51) > > Is the patch officially part of some service pack or is it third-party? > I checked the site where I fo

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

With all this talk of really old NTs, is there a reason ReactOS wouldn't work for some of you? -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! h

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 3:04 PM, TJ Edmister wrote: > On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 23:29:14 -0500, Rugxulo wrote: > >> BTW, NT 4.0 (1996?) didn't support either of those > > NT4 does support LFNs. Not in DOS apps, I meant, no Win9x-era "int 21h, 71xxh", AFAIK. > It supports FAT12/16 and NTFS out of

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Sun, 08 Dec 2013 21:37:02 +0100, TJ Edmister wrote: > On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 15:47:05 -0500, Jack > wrote: >> Opera V7,5, last one that works with Win/NT, and Earthlink dial-up. > > Opera 9.25 can work in NT4, I use it all the time. Browsing with > javascript disabled prevents most ads from l

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 23:29:14 -0500, Rugxulo wrote: > BTW, NT 4.0 (1996?) didn't support either of those NT4 does support LFNs. It supports FAT12/16 and NTFS out of the box, and with a patched system file it will support FAT32 also (same goes for NT3.51) > > The service packs are free, but t

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Sat, 07 Dec 2013 15:47:05 -0500, Jack wrote: > > > Opera V7,5, last one that works with Win/NT, and Earthlink dial-up. > Opera 9.25 can work in NT4, I use it all the time. Browsing with javascript disabled prevents most ads from loading. >> And sorry, but *something* has to pay for those "

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Louis Santillan wrote: > > On Friday, December 6, 2013, Rugxulo wrote: >> >> So this is not entirely conclusive. Presumably you'd have to find >> explicit bugs or features in a particular kernel in order to truly >> identify it (esp. if it is compressed and hac

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Jack wrote: > >> I certainly agree with your stance here. I have been using one >> ms-dos 7.1 package since at least 2007 or so, easily and effort- >> lessly. I have helped others find it as well. It might be "easier" to just tell them to make a bootable f

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:03 PM, dmccunney wrote: > On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Jack wrote: >> You may not consider it reliable, and Dennis may have some odd problem accessing it, but that website did give me, on 5-Dec-2013, a working 2-diskette copy

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Karen, > I certainly agree with your stance here. I have been using one > ms-dos 7.1 package since at least 2007 or so, easily and effort- > lessly. I have helped others find it as well. > I am not sure where the .bg country code is, but I could not > connect to the site when I tried it befor

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Greetings jack, I certainly agree with your stance here. I have been using one ms dos 7.1 package since at least 2007 or so easily and effortlessly. I have helped others find it as well. I am not sure where the .bg country code is, but I could not connect to the site when I tried it before wr

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Dennis, >>> Do a ping, whois, traceroute, or nslookup on it. Tell me what >>> you get. >> >> Wish I could, but I have none of those on my system ... > > They are highly useful tools, and available online as well in > addition to being local commands. What do you use as a browser, > and how do

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Friday, December 6, 2013, Rugxulo wrote: > > So this is not entirely conclusive. Presumably you'd have to find > explicit bugs or features in a particular kernel in order to truly > identify it (esp. if it is compressed and hacked with internal strings > modified). For trivia's sake, this is why

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Jack wrote: > >>> You may not consider it reliable, and Dennis may have some odd >>> problem accessing it, but that website >>> did give me, on 5-Dec-2013, a working 2-diskette copy of V7.10 >>> which I was able to "install" on my system ...

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Dennis, >> You may not consider it reliable, and Dennis may have some odd >> problem accessing it, but that website >> did give me, on 5-Dec-2013, a working 2-diskette copy of V7.10 >> which I was able to "install" on my system ... > > Do a ping, whois, traceroute, or nslo

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Jack wrote: > You may not consider it reliable, and Dennis may have some odd > problem accessing it, but that website > did give me, on 5-Dec-2013, a working 2-diskette copy of V7.10 > which I was able to "install" on my system (up to the p

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Rugxulo, Re: your recent posts, I will summarize my feeling as follows: "LZ-DOS" and other copies of V7.10 MS-DOS are still available. You may not consider it reliable, and Dennis may have some odd problem accessing it, but that website did give me, on 5-Dec-2013, a work

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, (yet another inane response from me) On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Jack wrote: >> >> It's really too bad, though, that MS won't make it official and release >> the MS-DOS source as public domain, or at least one of the various >> open-source licenses. How would that be better than what w

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Jack wrote: > >> Wengier Wu's MS-DOS 7 variant has a licensing issue ... > > "So what??", as I noted in my prior post. At least 18 years have > gone by since Gates & Co. declared "DOS is dead!", and no lawyers > I know of have EVER gone-after any V7.10 users

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Eric Auer wrote: > >> You mean LZ DOS is an improved rip of the MS DOS 7 kernel? Or >> is it just another DOS kernel which provides DOS 7.x compat? > > Unfortunately it is not improved at all: Somebody just took a > few components of MS DOS 7 and PC DOS 7 and R

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Jack wrote: > > Note on the FreeDOS "main page" that there are comments about FreeDOS > offering "LBA" large-disk capability (48-bit disk addressing, not 24- > bit "CHS"), which MS-DOS did not have, and which the "main page" says > was unavailable except with D

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Jack wrote: >> The ms-dos7.hit.bg site seems to have been offline since 2010 ... > > Oh, REALLY?? Sure worked well for me yesterday, 4-Dec-2013, when I got > both V7.10 MS-DOS diskettes and checked them! And it also caused me no > problems when I accessed the si

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

> The ms-dos7.ht.bg site seems to have been offline since 2010 ... Oh, REALLY?? Sure worked well for me yesterday, 4-Dec-2013, when I got both V7.10 MS-DOS diskettes and checked them! And it also caused me no problems when I accessed the site again, a moment ago!!

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Jack wrote: > If you go to and download their 2-diskette > V7.10 MS-DOS set, then write both diskettes and do an "install" of > then (omitting actually writing IO.SYS, MS-DOS.SYS, etc.), you will > note it "Sure LOOKS like!" a system which

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

> It's really too bad, though, that MS won't make it official and release > the MS-DOS source as public domain, or at least one of the various > open-source licenses. "Surely you JEST!", my friend [are joking]! "Gates & Co." are charter members of the U.S.A.'s "All we want is MONEY!" brotherhoo

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Eric, > I think that FreeDOS should also be more "bit-exact" and mention > "(only 32 bit useable due to MBR partitioning schema limitations)" > along with the LBA48 comment. Might also create feedback from > people who want to help to implement or test GPT partitions :-) "Zounds good" to me!

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi, I have to follow-up myself on LZ-DOS: > google translate of http://dos.nm.ru/ is only a kernel, freeware > provided as-is by JSC. Can be used with the userspace tools and > drivers of other DOS variants and generally sounds interesting. ... > You mean LZ DOS is an improved rip of the MS DOS

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Hi Jack, > Note on the FreeDOS "main page" that there are comments about FreeDOS > offering "LBA" large-disk capability (48-bit disk addressing, not 24- > bit "CHS"), which MS-DOS did not have, and which the "main page" says > was unavailable except with DOS Windows. I think that FreeDOS should

Re: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

, 2013 3:51 PM > To: freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: [Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS. > > Note on the FreeDOS "main page" that there are comments about FreeDOS > offering "LBA" large-disk capability (48-bit disk addressing, not 24- > bit &quo

[Freedos-user] "LBA" And FreeDOS.

Note on the FreeDOS "main page" that there are comments about FreeDOS offering "LBA" large-disk capability (48-bit disk addressing, not 24- bit "CHS"), which MS-DOS did not have, and which the "main page" says was unavailable except with DOS Windows. NOT quite true! From having written and teste

Re: [Freedos-user] LBA and clusters

>> I keep LBA disabled, for I partitioned the HD with >> 4-sector clusters. > > Clusters and LBA have nothing directly in common. Partitions are made up > only > of sectors. It's only subsequent formatting that gives birth to logical > clusters, after the act of partitioning is over. LBA is about

Re: [Freedos-user] LBA and clusters

On 2010/10/03 23:18 (GMT-0200) jassenna composed: > I mean the BIOS in the machine I am using (Award, > dated 12/08/1994) has LBA support, with > 1 logical block= 8 sectors. This value seems hardcoded. Back in 1994 the methodology and terminology for dealing with HDs >512M was nowhere close to

Re: [Freedos-user] LBA and clusters

At 06:18 PM 10/3/2010, jassen...@itelefonica\.com\.br wrote: > I mean the BIOS in the machine I am using (Award, >dated 12/08/1994) has LBA support, with >1 logical block= 8 sectors. This value seems hardcoded. Where do you get this info from? It just doesn't make any sense, even the old 28bit

[Freedos-user] LBA and clusters

Christian Masloch said: > The BIOS doesn't know anything about cluster sizes. > Maybe you mean sector sizes? Almost all floppy and > hard disks have a sector size of 512 byte. Expect > problems with hardware, firmware and/or software > if that is not the case. I mean the BIOS in the machine