Re: Linux syscalls
arargh405NOSPAM_at_NOW.AT.arargh.com
Date: 06/03/04
- Previous message: arargh405NOSPAM_at_NOW.AT.arargh.com: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- In reply to: Robert Redelmeier: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Next in thread: Robert Redelmeier: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Reply: Robert Redelmeier: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 19:02:52 -0500
On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 13:22:03 GMT, Robert Redelmeier
<redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
>Beth <BethStone21@hotmail.nospicedham.com> wrote in miniscule part:
>> Not to say that I would trust Microsoft completely in saying
>> some "DOS is completely gone" statement because they _have_ said
>> this before and it turned out not to be completely true (just
>> "mostly true" ;)...but something like XP has so many additional
>
>AFAIK, MS-WinNT and later vers (incl XP) use MS-DOS as a
>kernel bootloader. I think that "Safe Mode" screen is MS-DOS.
No, I think not. I think the the boot sector loads 'ntldr' and goes
from there.
>
>This does not mean the bootloader understands NTFS -- it
>could just load the kernel from contiguous sectors. `lilo`
>does it this way.
-- Arargh405 at [drop the 'http://www.' from ->] http://www.arargh.com BCET Basic Compiler Page: http://www.arargh.com/basic/index.html To reply by email, remove the garbage from the reply address.
- Previous message: arargh405NOSPAM_at_NOW.AT.arargh.com: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- In reply to: Robert Redelmeier: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Next in thread: Robert Redelmeier: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Reply: Robert Redelmeier: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]