OSDev.org

Posted: **Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:24 pm**

Emm thank you all. I have another very strange problem. The entry of the partition table (es:di) is 0x0:0x7CE (should be 0x0:0x1CE) in VMWare, booting from partition 1 (starting at zero). What's going on?

I read: http://wiki.osdev.org/MBR_(x86)

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 3:32 am**

lweb20 wrote:es:di

lweb20 wrote:I read: http://wiki.osdev.org/MBR_(x86)

Brendan wrote:DS:SI

Wiki wrote:DS:SI

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:52 am**

Combuster wrote:
lweb20 wrote:es:di
lweb20 wrote:I read: http://wiki.osdev.org/MBR_(x86)
Brendan wrote:DS:SI
Wiki wrote:DS:SI

mm.. sorry I wrote wrong. In my code have ds:si .. erase that image

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:17 am**

lweb20 wrote:Emm thank you all. I have another very strange problem. The entry of the partition table (es:di) is 0x0:0x7CE (should be 0x0:0x1CE) in VMWare, booting from partition 1 (starting at zero). What's going on?

I read: http://wiki.osdev.org/MBR_(x86)

And how did you come up with the "should be 0x0:0x1CE" part? What is going is that you can't read properly.

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:24 am**

erase that image

Can we trust your observations then? It is as of yet still a completely valid concern.

The answer is probably no because the remainder of your previous post contains one number I can't assert, and another blatant error, which makes the majority of your stated facts provably wrong.

[Edit]Today's ninja pointed that other error out for you

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:28 am**

Gigasoft wrote:
lweb20 wrote:Emm thank you all. I have another very strange problem. The entry of the partition table (es:di) is 0x0:0x7CE (should be 0x0:0x1CE) in VMWare, booting from partition 1 (starting at zero). What's going on?

I read: http://wiki.osdev.org/MBR_(x86)
And how did you come up with the "should be 0x0:0x1CE" part? What is going is that you can't read properly.

Code: Select all

0x   7    C    E
   111 1100 1110b

0x   1    C    E
   001 1100 1110b

I only consider low 9 bits.

EDIT: and my real partition index is 1 (starting in zero)

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:30 am**

lweb20 wrote:I only consider low 9 bits.

Not sure if trolling or just stupid.

Most likely trolling.

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:31 am**

Combuster wrote:
lweb20 wrote:I only consider low 9 bits.
Not sure of trolling or stupid. Most likely trolling.

mm then what any other ideas?

Posted: **Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:32 am**

A thread lock since your question has by all means been answered, and I'm going to save other people's time by not letting them bother finding out the actual truth..

OSDev.org

Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?

Re: Current drive?