Pure64 0.7.0

[IanSeyler]

After a long hiatus Pure64 v0.7.0 has been released. This was mainly a cleanup/optimization release. Also, multiboot support has been added.

Pure64 is a 64-bit software loader initially created for BareMetal OS. The loader gets the computer into a full 64-bit state with no legacy compatibility layers and also enables all available CPU Cores in the computer. If you need a quick way to boot a 64-bit AMD/Intel based computer that will enable all available processors and load your software then Pure64 is ideal. Pure64 keeps an information table in memory that stores important details about the computer (Amount of RAM and memory layout, number of CPU cores and their APIC IDs, etc). The Pure64 loader has been released separately so others can use it in their own software projects.

https://github.com/ReturnInfinity/Pure64

Feedback would be appreciated.

[Ycep]

Great! Amazing work!
But I think you gone too far with bootloader - It more looks like a barebone OS than a bootloader...

[crunch]

Great! Amazing work!
But I think you gone too far with bootloader - It more looks like a barebone OS than a bootloader...

Any decent/fully featured bootloader would resemble a barebone OS.
Nice work Ian

[Kevin]

But I think you gone too far with bootloader - It more looks like a barebone OS than a bootloader...

You mean it looks more like a bootloader than a quick and dirty hack from some bad tutorial?

Edit: Hm, had an actual quick look, and it still seems rather minimal for a good bootloader. But it's not 1.0 yet, so more features may still come, and at least it isn't just quickly hacked together but treated as a proper project of its own, which a good bootloader has to be.

[dchapiesky]

From a security perspective and an educational one as well, damn near anyone can understand what Pure64 is doing.... The fact that it gets you to 64 bit mode and hands off to its payload is valuable. The fact that it gets you to 64 bit mode and hands off to its payload while being completely commented and understandable is priceless.

If you work on x86-64 and are under code review - then I would take Pure64 over grub any day.

[Ycep]

But I think you gone too far with bootloader - It more looks like a barebone OS than a bootloader...

You mean it looks more like a bootloader than a quick and dirty hack from some bad tutorial?

Edit: Hm, had an actual quick look, and it still seems rather minimal for a good bootloader. But it's not 1.0 yet, so more features may still come, and at least it isn't just quickly hacked together but treated as a proper project of its own, which a good bootloader has to be.

Bootloader does not seem important to me, except if something needs to be initated in real-mode.
Kevin, if you speak the way you spoke with me in quoted post every day with adult people unlike me, you would quickly lose your head in less developed countries. True story. That's how my uncle got killed in 1999.

[matt11235]

But I think you gone too far with bootloader - It more looks like a barebone OS than a bootloader...

You mean it looks more like a bootloader than a quick and dirty hack from some bad tutorial?

Edit: Hm, had an actual quick look, and it still seems rather minimal for a good bootloader. But it's not 1.0 yet, so more features may still come, and at least it isn't just quickly hacked together but treated as a proper project of its own, which a good bootloader has to be.

Bootloader does not seem important to me, except if something needs to be initated in real-mode.
Kevin, if you speak the way you spoke with me in quoted post every day with adult people unlike me, you would quickly lose your head in less developed countries. True story. That's how my uncle got killed in 1999.

I think you misunderstood what Kevin said, he was polite and gave some good advice.

[Kevin]

Bootloader does not seem important to me, except if something needs to be initated in real-mode.

That's my point, kind of. If it doesn't seem important to you, then instead of doing a quick hack, you're better off using something existing instead.

But if you do decide that you need, or absolutely want, your own bootloader, then do it properly, which automatically makes it a reasonably large project of itself - that is, something almost like an OS. A bootloader that doesn't look like an OS at all has most likely too little functionality to be a good bootloader.

Kevin, if you speak the way you spoke with me in quoted post every day with adult people unlike me, you would quickly lose your head in less developed countries. True story. That's how my uncle got killed in 1999.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but I'm lucky enough to live in a country where it's generally considered okay to call a quick and dirty hack what it is. (And just to avoid any misunderstanding, I am not calling Pure64 such, but the typical 512 byte thingy from bad tutorials which don't advise beginners against writing their own bootloader.)