I did something dumb i did mount c c:
That was very stupid.
well whoopdy doo
wrote:I did something dumb i did mount c c:
That was very stupid.
Damn, guess you'll have to reformat your computer now.
Hey, Dosfreak, be careful what you post: He might take your advice seriously! 🤣 🤣
Visit the end of the internet: www.groskreutz.de
my computer has so far lasted almost a week with the mount c c: and i have no problems. What is so bad with mount c c:/. I don't have windows 3.1 yet and i have only used it on games and 4dos so what is going to happen to my computer. It says in the guide don't mount c c:/ but i have not had troubles yet. What's going to happen.
Potentially the deletion of all files on your hard drive or file corruption/modification that you would never notice until it's too late.
Not our problem, you have been warned. If you do it you're on your own.
Which brings to mind, would an AV program in Windows see a virus loaded into DOSBox's memory?
wrote:Which brings to mind, would an AV program in Windows see a virus loaded into DOSBox's memory?
Some would. Some of the more particularly vile ones attach directly to all file operations and read data on the fly as the program reads it. However, if the Virus is old DOS-style, some of the modern programs are starting to skip them if they don't do harm/can't run under XP et al.
Of course there's not a lot a virus could do executing from within Dosbox to your host installation, unless it was written specifically with Dosbox in mind, which is highly unlikely. A virus running inside Dosbox could of course play hell with whatever directories you have mounted...which is one of the many reasons not to mount C as C:, but not the principle one.
I found a dos linux.
http://short.stop.home.att.net/freesoft/os.htm
I have one question though how would i mount it. It's called basic linux and i am just wonderinghow i would mount so i don't encounter problems. It requires a 386. Does dosbox emulate that.
wrote:Does dosbox emulate that.
That's not even a question.
And it is not a DOS Linux. It is plain Linux, like any other Linux out there, just stripped down to fit into little memory.
It is dos though. How would i mount the linux.
I unzipped the bl3-50.zip file, and mounted the directory bl3-50 as my C: drive in DOSBox.
But when I tried to run BOOT.BAT, the loadlin program complained that:
CPU is in V86-mode (may be WINDOWS, EMM386, QEMM, 386MAX, ...)
You need pure 386/486 real mode or a VCPI server to boot Linux
VCPI is supported by most EMS drivers (if EMS is enabled),
but never under WINDOWS-3.1 or WINDOWS'95.
Unfortunately I don't know how get DOSBox into real-mode, or how to make that VCPI work.
DOSBox 60 seconds guide | How to ask questions
_________________
Lenovo M58p | Core 2 Quad Q8400 @ 2.66 GHz | Radeon R7 240 | LG HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GH40N | Fedora 32
It may be a Linux distro with a DOS launcher.
It's possible to bootstrap Linux from a DOS session, but then Linux removes DOS completely from the memory.
What a comletely senseless thread ... is this?
This is, afterall, the "dosbox general" forum.
By the way, abyss:
What do you want to tell us: You tell us how stupid you were to mount c c: (1.), then you insist that this was not really stupid (it was, though) (2.) and then you come across with a "dos linux" (what the hell is this?) (3.).
What are we to expect next? A "dos amiga-os"?
Visit the end of the internet: www.groskreutz.de
Well, I guess it's not easy to get a post count this high so fast (considering that he already surpassed both of us). 😉
If you can't do it with senseful and meaningful post you'll have to achieve it otherwise...
The thread's title and it's nature seemingly reflect almost all of abyss's posts.
wrote:It may be a Linux distro with a DOS launcher.
It's possible to bootstrap Linux from a DOS session, but then Linux removes DOS completely from the memory.
Loadlin used ot be the standard way to boot linux in ancient times, when people didn't want to mess with their partition setup. As has been guessed, right, it sets up memory as linux expects it, and then gives control to the linux boot code, which switches to pmode, initializes drivers and so on... With no disk image mounted, it can't ever work. AFAIK the CPU emulation is not complete enough for a real 32-bit OS anyways.
CPU is probably fine (perhaps some #ifdef enabled for better exception support?), I think the biggest reason why it won't work is disk access. There are no IDE ports 😀
