x16-PRos - 16 bit OS written full in assembly

[devout ravine]

I am 13 yo btw

And i make it completely from scratch

Unfortunately I can't make a file system. I'm not that experienced yet.

[proper talon]

Im wondering why dont you use 32-bit for just a little more useful features

Because if you really need 16-bit interrupts you can always use vm8086

[devout ravine]

that's the goal of the project. 32 bit is pretty common so I'd like to do something... well special

I also want the OS to work on almost all x86 computers

[proper talon]

I would atleast add protected mode because you can check for it

So if its not availible you can just not use it

[devout ravine]

Yes, but i realy wana do everything in the real mode

[proper talon]

In real mode protected mode you can still use the base interrupts

U can then even make a userspace that cant do certain instructions

[devout ravine]

I have an idea. Since my OS does not have any restrictions on programs, it is possible to implement the necessary 32-bit functionality in a separate program.

[wet viper]

don't recommend that

use long mode

[proper talon]

He is making a 16 bit os so why should he use long mode

[grim axle]

with appropriate conventions and restrictions on programs, real mode programs can run in protected and long mode

which also have submodes which can run 16-bit programs

on 386 and above, you can even preemptively multitask multiple instances of your OS using virtual 8086 mode

[devout ravine]

New version just relised on github:
https://github.com/PRoX2011/x16-PRos

[devout ravine]

x16-PRos - 16 bit OS written full in assembly

is my OS good or nah?

[proper talon]

Idk

[grim axle]

A lot of the programs look neat.

[devout ravine]

)))

[grim axle]

however

I'd seriously consider having a file system

it's not that complicated to implement

[devout ravine]

I've tried several times already, but I still can't do it. I need someone who can seriously help me with this.

[grim axle]

in addition

I mean

looking at it, the programs seem to be mainly using BIOS service calls

does the kernel provide any system calls or abstractions at all?

[devout ravine]

I'm almost done with developing my interrupt vector.

[grim axle]

what's a transformation vector?

oh

interrupt vector

which interrupt number are you using?

[grim axle]

like, your kernel seems mostly like a shell with some hard coded commands

and option to load a program from a particular sector on disk

it would be closer to an actual OS, if the OS provided services which abstracted over everything

so programs don't need to use the BIOS directly

[devout ravine]

there are no changes on github yet, but at this stage I made an interrupt that simplifies the output of lines and adds functions for entering numbers and so on

INT 21h

[devout ravine]

I'm working on it

[grim axle]

What's the isue that is holding you back?

Maybe I could help.

[devout ravine]

sory for bad English, i am from Russia, and only relatively recently I started learning English

[grim axle]

ah

no problem

[devout ravine]

First of all, it is the lack of a file system and the necessary skills in developing this kind of software (I have only been involved in OS development for 5 months)

[grim axle]

what file system did you try to implement?

[devout ravine]

FAT12

[grim axle]

ah

I've implemented FAT12 multiple times before, so I could definitely help, if you have any particular issue

[devout ravine]

it would be good, but I don't even have a normal basis for implementation

[devout ravine]

but i have my implementation of FAt12 bootloader (just load kernel.bin). it was not possible to implement the launch of programs from files, as well as their creation, editing and deletion

[devout ravine]

@grim axle Can you help me..?

[grim axle]

well, could you be more specific?

[grim axle]

what does "normal basis" mean?

[devout ravine]

as I already said my implementation creates only a bootloader, and the kernel cannot create, manage, and run programs from files. I can send you my unfinished implementation in private message

[grim axle]

but what prevents you from completing the implementation?

[devout ravine]

I don't have enough knowledge. Maybe I made a mistake somewhere. I didn't find step-by-step instructions on how to implement FAT12, so... I only managed to make a bootloader(((

[proper talon]

Check out nanobyte he has a vid about inplementing fat12

[grim axle]

check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_of_the_FAT_file_system

this is a fairly complete description of the FAT file system

it's not that complicated

you have the boot sector, the FAT, the root directory, and the data area

[proper talon]

Also why dont you try doing some sort of watcom so you can use C

[devout ravine]

Hete is my realisation

It works not well

And FAT16 (if works better, and it has simple terminal)

[proper talon]

?

[devout ravine]

I would like to continue working with FAT16

[devout ravine]

I don`t wana use C

[proper talon]

Why not

[devout ravine]

don't ask, it's just necessary

[proper talon]

Why?

[grim axle]

https://github.com/lukflug/LK-LDR86/blob/main/boot.asm

here's a simple FAT12/16/32 bootloader I wrote

[devout ravine]

my implementation has a bootloader, I just don't understand how to manage files from the kernel (sorry for being annoying)

[grim axle]

I'd look into how ancient UNIX and DOS 2.0 do it

namely how the syscall interface looks like

and implement it based on that

there's open, close, read, write, creat, link, unlink, chmod, lseek, fstat

[devout ravine]

Ok i will try to create this

[grim axle]

and ftruncate maybe too

[arctic prism]

but you wrote FAT16

[devout ravine]

My realization of FAT16 much better than FAT12 realization

[devout ravine]

Finally made FAT12

[fair merlin]

finally an original OS