[GNUz] O/S compare

[Richard Tindall]

Ah, good one - io.sys - thanks..

Jim Cheetham wrote:

>http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/FGA/dos-windows-boot-process.html
>  
>

This is the point where the CLI got sidelined:

"Changes to the DOS boot process in MS-DOS version 7.


In the version of MS-DOS first shipped as DOS-Windows 95, the following 
changes to the above DOS boot process were made:

   1.

      The DOS kernel image became a single file, io.sys, containing what
      was previously split across io.sys and msdos.sys. This allowed the
      name msdos.sys to be re-used. That file became a text file
      containing various configuration directives that the DOS kernel
      obeyed. Ironically, one of the options in the configuration file
      is to turn off the new behaviour in change 2 :

   2.

      The DOS kernel was changed to directly invoke win.com, skipping
      the loading and running of the command interpreter entirely, if an
      autoexec.bat file in the root directory did not exist. If an
      autoexec.bat file in the root directory did exist, the DOS kernel
      would invoke the command interpreter as before. However, the
      system was also changed so that the command interpreter would
      invoke win.com after it had processed the autoexec.bat script."


..How does NT/2K/XP differ?

>
>But, because the architecture of Microsoft's operating systems is unlike
>Unix, the term "kernel" doesn't map exactly.
>  
>
Monolithic kernels GNU/Linux vs MS are worth comparing I reckon. Especially if a GNU/BSD/Mach is likely to be developed from Darwin.

Cheers, Rik