Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: fishy_fiz on September 03, 2011, 08:50:09 AM

Title: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: fishy_fiz on September 03, 2011, 08:50:09 AM
The topic probably covers it. I see no reason why it wouldnt be possible, but has anyone installed any non-ms OSes inside pc-task? I dont think Ive ever seen anyone mention running linux, bsd, aros, etc. inside it. Id like to experiment a little, but before I delve too far would be interested to hear if anyone knows of any reasons other oses wont work?
Thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: RedskullDC on September 03, 2011, 08:59:40 AM
Hi Fishy_fiz,

I do remember running DR-DOS in PC-TASK 4.x OK.

Cheers,
Red
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: spirantho on September 03, 2011, 09:26:55 AM
Quote from: fishy_fiz;657602
The topic probably covers it. I see no reason why it wouldnt be possible, but has anyone installed any non-ms OSes inside pc-task? I dont think Ive ever seen anyone mention running linux, bsd, aros, etc. inside it. Id like to experiment a little, but before I delve too far would be interested to hear if anyone knows of any reasons other oses wont work?
Thanks in advance.


There's only one way to find out... :)

In theory they should work but I wouldn't count on it. It depends on how good the MMU emulation is and my understanding is that PC-Task's MMU is just enough to get Win95 to start up.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: Steady on September 03, 2011, 11:14:25 AM
@ fishy_fiz

 I reckon you should try an old version of OS/2 just to see if it will work (yes I know it is MS/IBM). Apparently it is notoriously hard to emulate because it uses ring 1 & 2 whereas others only use ring 0 & 3 on the intel chips. If it works, it is a pretty good emulation, but you may be waiting a while for it to boot ;-)
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: Digiman on September 03, 2011, 11:33:54 AM
Quote from: Steady;657618
@ fishy_fiz

 I reckon you should try an old version of OS/2 just to see if it will work (yes I know it is MS/IBM). Apparently it is notoriously hard to emulate because it uses ring 1 & 2 whereas others only use ring 0 & 3 on the intel chips. If it works, it is a pretty good emulation, but you may be waiting a while for it to boot ;-)


OS/2 is 0% M$, IBM did do a little deal with C= so they got some multitasking kernal help and Commodore got AREXX in return.

As to running things x86 CPU emulated speed is the problem, try DR-DOS + GEM if you have 030 or above :)
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: Zac67 on September 03, 2011, 12:01:43 PM
Unices / more complex OSes require a functional MMU which is not emulated...
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: Pentad on September 03, 2011, 12:39:38 PM
Quote from: Digiman;657620
OS/2 is 0% M$...



You might want to check out the OS/2 article on Wikipedia.  MS was quite heavily involved with OS/2 until 1990.

Cheers!
-P
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: fishy_fiz on September 03, 2011, 12:54:30 PM
I thought I should clarify. When I say non-ms oses it's not so much that I have anything against them, more just Ive not seen anyone mention running anything other than dos, or Win95. As for speed, it's actually my amithlon box that Im wanting to try other OSes on, so it should be tolerable, assuming of course I can get something to actually run :)
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: mongo on September 03, 2011, 01:46:03 PM
Quote from: Digiman;657620
OS/2 is 0% M$, IBM did do a little deal with C= so they got some multitasking kernal help and Commodore got AREXX in return.


I don't know where you got your information from, but that's not anywhere close to being true.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: commodorejohn on September 03, 2011, 03:20:58 PM
Quote from: mongo;657640
I don't know where you got your information from, but that's not anywhere close to being true.
Wikipedia corroborates Commodore licensing Amiga technology in exchange for REXX, but it doesn't say whether any of the AOS code actually made it into OS/2 or not. In any case, certainly Microsoft was involved.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: nicholas on September 03, 2011, 03:33:50 PM
Quote from: commodorejohn;657658
Wikipedia corroborates Commodore licensing Amiga technology in exchange for REXX, but it doesn't say whether any of the AOS code actually made it into OS/2 or not. In any case, certainly Microsoft was involved.


IIRC it was GUI technology that IBM licensed from CBM for OS/2.

On a related note, I believe Sun licensed the Autoconfig technology from CBM for use in their SPARC machines.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: mongo on September 03, 2011, 03:48:08 PM
Quote from: commodorejohn;657658
Wikipedia corroborates Commodore licensing Amiga technology in exchange for REXX, but it doesn't say whether any of the AOS code actually made it into OS/2 or not. In any case, certainly Microsoft was involved.


Commodore didn't get REXX from IBM. ARexx was a commercial product by William Hawes that they licensed for inclusion into AmigaOS 2.0.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: nicholas on September 03, 2011, 04:01:00 PM
Quote from: mongo;657665
Commodore didn't get REXX from IBM. ARexx was a commercial product by William Hawes that they licensed for inclusion into AmigaOS 2.0.


Wasn't there some problem with the licensing of AREXX from Hawes? CBM not paying for it or something?
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: Karlos on September 03, 2011, 04:02:34 PM
Getting back to the original question, there must be a bunch of embedded x86 OSes that don't require MMU functionality...
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: nicholas on September 03, 2011, 04:07:26 PM
Quote from: Karlos;657669
Getting back to the original question, there must be a bunch of embedded x86 OSes that don't require MMU functionality...

There is uCLinux but one would have to compile own 486 boot images.

The old QNX demo floppy would probably boot too.

Also, there is ELKS. (http://elks.sourceforge.net/)
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: commodorejohn on September 03, 2011, 04:10:03 PM
Quote from: Karlos;657669
Getting back to the original question, there must be a bunch of embedded x86 OSes that don't require MMU functionality...
I can't remember whether Minix straight-up doesn't use the MMU or just doesn't require it, but I believe that's the case. And there's ELKS. (http://elks.sourceforge.net/) Also, FreeDOS might be worth a shot.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: bbond007 on September 03, 2011, 04:10:04 PM
Quote from: fishy_fiz;657602
The topic probably covers it. I see no reason why it wouldnt be possible, but has anyone installed any non-ms OSes inside pc-task? I dont think Ive ever seen anyone mention running linux, bsd, aros, etc. inside it. Id like to experiment a little, but before I delve too far would be interested to hear if anyone knows of any reasons other oses wont work?
Thanks in advance.


You might try PC GEOS. I guess it may not be considered a OS but could be interesting.
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: nicholas on September 03, 2011, 04:14:40 PM
Quote from: commodorejohn;657671
I can't remember whether Minix straight-up doesn't use the MMU or just doesn't require it, but I believe that's the case. And there's ELKS. (http://elks.sourceforge.net/) Also, FreeDOS might be worth a shot.

Minix 2.04 was the last version to work without an MMU (286 distro).

http://www.minix3.org/previous-versions/
http://minix1.woodhull.com/
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: nicholas on September 03, 2011, 04:18:01 PM
GEM (http://www.deltasoft.com/downloads.htm)
CPM86 (http://www.cpm.z80.de/binary.html)
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: nicholas on September 03, 2011, 04:39:12 PM
http://qnx.projektas.lt/qnxdemo/qnx_demo_disk.htm
Title: Re: Non MS OSes in PC-Task?
Post by: Templario on September 03, 2011, 11:52:26 PM
You think that PCTask was made for emulate DOS programs MS-Dos or the best DOS OS DR-DOS under one 286-386-486 and this CPUs only run in that age MS-Dos and DR-DOS because other OS as the OS2 from IBM and others were less used.