Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Mar 1997 18:58:59 +0000
From:      James Mansion <james@wgold.demon.co.uk>
To:        FreeBSD-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: pcvt/132 columns
Message-ID:  <3325AB73.7FD1@wgold.demon.co.uk>
References:  <199703111658.JAA25415@phaeton.artisoft.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote:
> 
> > > As to your question, it's a non-sequitur... DOS supports .EXE files,
> > > but BIOS POST does not.  You also presume (incorrectly) that DOS is
> > > an OS.
> >
> > Terry, I may not think very highly of DOS, even given the context in
> > which it was written, but it is an OS, at least I maintain it is.  Could
> > you defend that remark?
> 
> It is a disk loader and a non-reentrant real mode interrupt handler; I
> know this is already common knowledge...
> 
> It does not have these OS features:

These might be worthwhile features, but to claim that something
which does not implement them is not an OS and is 'a loader' is
just playing with words.

While I agree that the items on your list are valuable, I think you
are manipulating language unreasonably.

> 
> o       Multitasking (an OS which can not multitask is a loader, not
>         an OS)

Be realistic - it might load your app, but it continues to provide
services to the app (and the various device drivers).

It is not 'just a loader'.

Its an OS.

A nasty one.

> o       Resource tracking
>         o       Memory (the big one)
>         o       Open file handles
>         o       Anything not hung off the PSP

Show me a definition (other than YOURS that makes this a requirement.

> o       Memory protection

Hmm - maybe we should call Apple's system 'MacLoader' then.

> o       System reentrancy (there is a single BIOS call stack for
>         most BIOS calls, which is why they are not available to
>         TSR's that don't supply their own system stack)

Again, show me a justification why this is a requirement.

> o       Fault recovery (pretty obvious it can't be done without
>         resource tracking and memory protection, etc.)
> 
> In addition, an OS enables software engineering.  I could go on for
> days about how DOS fails in this regard.

A *good OD* might.  But its by no means a requirement.

> 
>                                         Regards,
>                                         Terry Lambert
>                                         terry@lambert.org
> ---
> Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
> or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3325AB73.7FD1>