Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader Execption: DIVIDE BY ZERO

[Jerry]

I had this same problem when developing my bootsector. When I reset the 
bootdrive before I jumped to freeldr the problem went away. I think that 
the first thing that freeldr needs to is to reset the boot drive before 
it moves on.

[e-mail] wrote:
> http://www.reactos.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=390
>
> ------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-02-25 00:17 CET -------
> got the same problem with the boot cd 2.9 on a travelmate 290.    
> shoud be the same hardware and the same crappy "insyde software" bios (v2.0 on   
> my chip):    
> Press any key to boot from CD <enter>
>
> Failed to read the PVD.    
> Press any key    
> Failed to read the super block.    
> Press any key <enter>  
> Failed to read boot sector.    
> Press any key <enter>  
> Failed to read boot sector.    
> Press any key <enter>  
> Unable to locate boot parition
>
> Press any key <enter>  
> Error opening boot partition for file access. <enter>
>
> Press any key to boot from CD
>
> And so on...  
> Notice that one time the any-key message appears without waitig for any key.
>
> And, after the first "round" it waits way shorter for any keypress to boot  
> from CD (the time between two dots printed has decreased). 
> I experienced this problem with the first LiveCD version i tried (2.0 i 
> think).

[Brian Palmer]

Why are you wasting your time writing a completely new untested boot sector
when FreeLoader already has a fully working fully tested, stable, and
debugged boot sector? I know, I know - you're going to say that it is a
reverse engineered Microsoft boot sector. There are actually two - one is a
reverse engineered Microsoft boot sector, and the other is FreeLoaders.
Anyone who actually compares the source side by side can see that
FreeLoaders boot sector code is *not* a copy of Microsofts. They are vastly
different. I keep waiting for the auditors to do their job and audit this
piece of code, but they don't seem to be doing it. The point is, we don't
need another boot sector when, as soon as the code gets audited, the
original boot sector will be just fine.

BTW - where can I download your boot sector code? It should be audited just
as much as the original boot sector code, since you've undoubtedly looked at
the FreeLoader & boot sector sources to see how things are done.

-Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
Behalf Of Jerry
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 4:42 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader Execption: DIVIDE
BYZERO

I had this same problem when developing my bootsector. When I reset the 
bootdrive before I jumped to freeldr the problem went away. I think that 
the first thing that freeldr needs to is to reset the boot drive before 
it moves on.

[e-mail] wrote:
> http://www.reactos.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=390
>
> ------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]

2006-02-25 00:17 CET -------
> got the same problem with the boot cd 2.9 on a travelmate 290.    
> shoud be the same hardware and the same crappy "insyde software" bios

(v2.0 on
> my chip):    
> Press any key to boot from CD <enter>
>
> Failed to read the PVD.    
> Press any key    
> Failed to read the super block.    
> Press any key <enter>  
> Failed to read boot sector.    
> Press any key <enter>  
> Failed to read boot sector.    
> Press any key <enter>  
> Unable to locate boot parition
>
> Press any key <enter>  
> Error opening boot partition for file access. <enter>
>
> Press any key to boot from CD
>
> And so on...  
> Notice that one time the any-key message appears without waitig for any

key.
> And, after the first "round" it waits way shorter for any keypress to boot
> from CD (the time between two dots printed has decreased). 
> I experienced this problem with the first LiveCD version i tried (2.0 i 
> think).

_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
[e-mail]
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Brandon Turner]

Taken from Ged's email ealier:
"First of all, we must take the authors word on whether something needs 
auditing or not."

If you say it is clean, it is good enough for me.  Lets move on.

Brandon

Brian Palmer wrote:
> Why are you wasting your time writing a completely new untested boot sector
> when FreeLoader already has a fully working fully tested, stable, and
> debugged boot sector? I know, I know - you're going to say that it is a
> reverse engineered Microsoft boot sector. There are actually two - one is a
> reverse engineered Microsoft boot sector, and the other is FreeLoaders.
> Anyone who actually compares the source side by side can see that
> FreeLoaders boot sector code is *not* a copy of Microsofts. They are vastly
> different. I keep waiting for the auditors to do their job and audit this
> piece of code, but they don't seem to be doing it. The point is, we don't
> need another boot sector when, as soon as the code gets audited, the
> original boot sector will be just fine.
>
> BTW - where can I download your boot sector code? It should be audited just
> as much as the original boot sector code, since you've undoubtedly looked at
> the FreeLoader & boot sector sources to see how things are done.
>
> -Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
> Behalf Of Jerry
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 4:42 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader Execption: DIVIDE
> BYZERO
>
> I had this same problem when developing my bootsector. When I reset the 
> bootdrive before I jumped to freeldr the problem went away. I think that 
> the first thing that freeldr needs to is to reset the boot drive before 
> it moves on.
>
> [e-mail] wrote:
> > http://www.reactos.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=390
> >
> > ------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]
>
> 2006-02-25 00:17 CET -------
> > got the same problem with the boot cd 2.9 on a travelmate 290.    
> > shoud be the same hardware and the same crappy "insyde software" bios
>
> (v2.0 on
> > my chip):    
> > Press any key to boot from CD <enter>
> >
> > Failed to read the PVD.    
> > Press any key    
> > Failed to read the super block.    
> > Press any key <enter>  
> > Failed to read boot sector.    
> > Press any key <enter>  
> > Failed to read boot sector.    
> > Press any key <enter>  
> > Unable to locate boot parition
> >
> > Press any key <enter>  
> > Error opening boot partition for file access. <enter>
> >
> > Press any key to boot from CD
> >
> > And so on...  
> > Notice that one time the any-key message appears without waitig for any
>
> key.
> > And, after the first "round" it waits way shorter for any keypress to boot
> > from CD (the time between two dots printed has decreased). 
> > I experienced this problem with the first LiveCD version i tried (2.0 i 
> > think).
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Jerry]

My bootsector is clean, and it is /highly/ derived from the *FreeDOS* 
bootsector (GPL). If you take the FreeDOS bootsector and mine and look 
at them side by side you will find some striking similarities. I have 
complied with the GPL and put the derivative work under the GPL too. I 
haven't been able to get a dev to look at it yet. If any who fall in 
that category want to, I'll send it to you.

Brandon Turner wrote:
> Taken from Ged's email ealier:
> "First of all, we must take the authors word on whether something 
> needs auditing or not."
>
> If you say it is clean, it is good enough for me.  Lets move on.
>
> Brandon
>
> Brian Palmer wrote:
> > Why are you wasting your time writing a completely new untested boot 
> > sector
> > when FreeLoader already has a fully working fully tested, stable, and
> > debugged boot sector? I know, I know - you're going to say that it is a
> > reverse engineered Microsoft boot sector. There are actually two - 
> > one is a
> > reverse engineered Microsoft boot sector, and the other is FreeLoaders.
> > Anyone who actually compares the source side by side can see that
> > FreeLoaders boot sector code is *not* a copy of Microsofts. They are 
> > vastly
> > different. I keep waiting for the auditors to do their job and audit 
> > this
> > piece of code, but they don't seem to be doing it. The point is, we 
> > don't
> > need another boot sector when, as soon as the code gets audited, the
> > original boot sector will be just fine.
> >
> > BTW - where can I download your boot sector code? It should be 
> > audited just
> > as much as the original boot sector code, since you've undoubtedly 
> > looked at
> > the FreeLoader & boot sector sources to see how things are done.
> >
> > -Brian
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [e-mail] 
> > [mailto:[e-mail]] On
> > Behalf Of Jerry
> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 4:42 PM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Subject: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader Execption: DIVIDE
> > BYZERO
> >
> > I had this same problem when developing my bootsector. When I reset 
> > the bootdrive before I jumped to freeldr the problem went away. I 
> > think that the first thing that freeldr needs to is to reset the boot 
> > drive before it moves on.
> >
> > [e-mail] wrote:
> > > http://www.reactos.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=390
> > >
> > > ------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]
> >
> > 2006-02-25 00:17 CET -------
> > > got the same problem with the boot cd 2.9 on a travelmate 290.    
> > > shoud be the same hardware and the same crappy "insyde software" bios
> >
> > (v2.0 on
> > > my chip):    Press any key to boot from CD <enter>     Failed to 
> > > read the PVD.    Press any key    Failed to read the super block.    
> > > Press any key <enter>  Failed to read boot sector.    Press any key 
> > > <enter>  Failed to read boot sector.    Press any key <enter>  
> > > Unable to locate boot parition       Press any key <enter>  Error 
> > > opening boot partition for file access. <enter>   
> > > Press any key to boot from CD   
> > > And so on...  Notice that one time the any-key message appears 
> > > without waitig for any
> >
> > key.
> > > And, after the first "round" it waits way shorter for any keypress 
> > > to boot
> > > from CD (the time between two dots printed has decreased). I 
> > > experienced this problem with the first LiveCD version i tried (2.0 
> > > i think).
> >
> > Ros-dev mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> >
> > Ros-dev mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Ged Murphy]

Jerry wrote:
> My bootsector is clean, and it is /highly/ derived from the *FreeDOS* 
> bootsector (GPL). If you take the FreeDOS bootsector and mine and look 
> at them side by side you will find some striking similarities. I have 
> complied with the GPL and put the derivative work under the GPL too. I 
> haven't been able to get a dev to look at it yet. If any who fall in 
> that category want to, I'll send it to you.

What Brian is saying is, if we already have a perfectly good boot 
sector, what is the point in replacing it?
Brians FreeLoader has been tried and tested and it should be kept.

Ged.

[Magnus Olsen]

I agreed with Ged here.
in this matters.  I do want replace it with u bootloader etihers

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ged Murphy" [e-mail]
To: "ReactOS Development List" [e-mail]
Sent: den 25 February 2006 13:40
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader Execption:
DIVIDEBYZERO
> Jerry wrote:
> > My bootsector is clean, and it is /highly/ derived from the *FreeDOS*
> > bootsector (GPL). If you take the FreeDOS bootsector and mine and look
> > at them side by side you will find some striking similarities. I have
> > complied with the GPL and put the derivative work under the GPL too. I
> > haven't been able to get a dev to look at it yet. If any who fall in
> > that category want to, I'll send it to you.
>
> What Brian is saying is, if we already have a perfectly good boot
> sector, what is the point in replacing it?
> Brians FreeLoader has been tried and tested and it should be kept.
>
> Ged.
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Jerry]

My bootsector fits in one 512 byte block and takes in account of file 
fragmentation.

Ged Murphy wrote:
> Jerry wrote:
> > My bootsector is clean, and it is /highly/ derived from the *FreeDOS* 
> > bootsector (GPL). If you take the FreeDOS bootsector and mine and 
> > look at them side by side you will find some striking similarities. I 
> > have complied with the GPL and put the derivative work under the GPL 
> > too. I haven't been able to get a dev to look at it yet. If any who 
> > fall in that category want to, I'll send it to you.
>
> What Brian is saying is, if we already have a perfectly good boot 
> sector, what is the point in replacing it?
> Brians FreeLoader has been tried and tested and it should be kept.
>
> Ged.
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Brian Palmer]

Hi Jerry,

Would you mind sending it to me? I would like to see it.

-Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
Behalf Of Jerry
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:25 AM
To: ReactOS Development List
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader Execption:
DIVIDEBYZERO

My bootsector fits in one 512 byte block and takes in account of file 
fragmentation.

Ged Murphy wrote:
> Jerry wrote:
> > My bootsector is clean, and it is /highly/ derived from the *FreeDOS* 
> > bootsector (GPL). If you take the FreeDOS bootsector and mine and 
> > look at them side by side you will find some striking similarities. I 
> > have complied with the GPL and put the derivative work under the GPL 
> > too. I haven't been able to get a dev to look at it yet. If any who 
> > fall in that category want to, I'll send it to you.
>
> What Brian is saying is, if we already have a perfectly good boot 
> sector, what is the point in replacing it?
> Brians FreeLoader has been tried and tested and it should be kept.
>
> Ged.
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
[e-mail]
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Magnus Olsen]

it only support FAT16
not long file name.
I did talk with him one week back and told him we are not instred in his
boot loaders

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Palmer" [e-mail]
To: "'ReactOS Development List'" [e-mail]
Sent: den 25 February 2006 19:50
Subject: RE: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader
Execption:DIVIDEBYZERO
> Hi Jerry,
>
> Would you mind sending it to me? I would like to see it.
>
> -Brian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
> Behalf Of Jerry
> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:25 AM
> To: ReactOS Development List
> Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-bugs] [Bug 390] Freeloader Execption:
> DIVIDEBYZERO
>
> My bootsector fits in one 512 byte block and takes in account of file
> fragmentation.
>
> Ged Murphy wrote:
> > Jerry wrote:
> > > My bootsector is clean, and it is /highly/ derived from the *FreeDOS*
> > > bootsector (GPL). If you take the FreeDOS bootsector and mine and
> > > look at them side by side you will find some striking similarities. I
> > > have complied with the GPL and put the derivative work under the GPL
> > > too. I haven't been able to get a dev to look at it yet. If any who
> > > fall in that category want to, I'll send it to you.
> >
> > What Brian is saying is, if we already have a perfectly good boot
> > sector, what is the point in replacing it?
> > Brians FreeLoader has been tried and tested and it should be kept.
> >
> > Ged.
> >
> > Ros-dev mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
> Ros-dev mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev