Re: Linux syscalls
From: Beth (BethStone21_at_hotmail.NOSPICEDHAM.com)
Date: 06/09/04
- Previous message: Beth: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- In reply to: arargh405NOSPAM_at_NOW.AT.arargh.com: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Next in thread: Beth: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 00:41:05 +0100
Arargh wrote:
> ntldr (NT4 version) makes NO Int 21h calls. It also enters
protected
> mode, which is unlikely for a DOS program. It is a mixed-mode
16bit
> real and 32bit protected program from what a quick look tells
me.
>
> IMO, a stand alone program.
In fact, that sounds like the _perfect description_ of an "OS
loader" program...
A raw binary file that doesn't access any OS routines (because,
being the OS loader, it runs _prior_ to the OS existing - hence
can't access any OS, obviously - so can only use BIOS and direct
access)...and then is "mixed 16 / 32 bit code" for making that
"protected mode switch" from the real mode that the PC naturally
boots into to 32-bit protected mode that the NT kernel runs
under...plus, the mnemonical name "NTLDR" is also strongly
backing this up as most likely standing for: "NT's LOADER"...
Basically, "NTLDR" is NT's actual OS loader binary file that the
bootsector loads and transfers control to (after all, a
bootsector can only be 512 bytes so it can't do the whole
process for any non-trivial OS in such a small space...well,
instead, it can load a second file from disk to actually do the
real OS loading process...a "loader" program..."IO.SYS" used to
do this with DOS, "NTLDR" does it with NT :)..."BOOT.INI" is, as
can be seen with Notepad, the actual plain text file with ".ini"
configuration text for the list of OSes under the "bootmenu" (a
menu by-passed if there's only one OS installed but a website I
read suggested that this is one of "NTLDR"'s jobs in printing
out the "bootmenu" as well as then actually proceeding to load
the OSes selected from the menu)...
"NTDETECT.COM" does play a part in this somewhere but I don't
know exactly what...
The other files there, though, are, in most cases, basically
"backwards compatibility"...the "0 bytes" file size being a clue
that they _can't_ be doing anything because, really, they aren't
even files...they are more like "placeholder filenames"...just
directory entries without any actual data file attached...
Beth :)
- Previous message: Beth: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- In reply to: arargh405NOSPAM_at_NOW.AT.arargh.com: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Next in thread: Beth: "Re: Linux syscalls"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|