OS v2020 (file system subsystem and FAT32 LBA)

[~]

https://sourceforge.net/projects/lowest ... r/download

Extract the TAR to a FAT32 LBA root directory with DOS (hard disk, bootable USB/SD) and run c:\start.bat. It works even in the newest laptops (they have PS/2 keyboard/mice).

This version of my OS contains code in ATA-ATAPI, Storage, FS and kconsole directories. It supports dir and type commands for the first partition as FAT32 LBA in the primary master. The idea was to write logs to the disk for debugging, but I still have to make sure to write to disk without bugs, or I will destroy the disk. It will serve me this year to debug my code to disk to record complex actions from the point of view of machine resources.

It builds on the v2019 kernel which implemented simple malloc/free to handle the sort of requests of file systems and other more complex instances that are created and destroyed.

The mass storage subsystem is simply a chain of file system elements (files, directoryes, dirents), partitions and storage device IDs in their own lists from which the code resolves which other actual functions to call to handle the request. From the highest to the lowest level of structs and functions it's easy to know what we need to call transparently.

The idea is to make the code as clean as to make it easy to explain how to handle FAT in 8.3 and LFN name mode, and make it easier for beginners to pick up faster and dedicate time to other topics with this resource available in a fully implemented and educative fashion.

[Octocontrabass]

Why did you include so many things that aren't part of your OS?

Why didn't you include a bootable disk image so we can try your OS inside a virtual machine?

[nexos]

I wonder why on Sourceforge, it says malware detected. Is this is a trick to download malware? I might test in a VM to see.

[Octocontrabass]

Oh, I forgot to check that. Yes, there are signs of malware in there. Unfortunately, none of the scanners report which file in the archive is triggering the positive response, so it's hard to gauge the risk.

[Schol-R-LEA]

I find it interesting, but not surprising, that over three years after I pointed out to ~ that he is using Sourceforge incorrectly, he is still making the same mistakes. There seems to be no attempt to use version control at all in this, and no evidence that he actually understands how version control works.

What version control system are you trying to use, ~? There's nothing to indicate you're using any of the common ones such as Git or Subversion.

And no, SourceForge isn't a VCS, it is a hosting service. It natively supports version control systems including (AFAICT) CVS, Subversion, and Git, but you'd still need to use the VCS itself to get the advantages of it.

[Schol-R-LEA]

Oh, I forgot to check that. Yes, there are signs of malware in there. Unfortunately, none of the scanners report which file in the archive is triggering the positive response, so it's hard to gauge the risk.

According to ClamAV, the file in question is api/hist/hist_2007.html.

[Octocontrabass]

According to ClamAV, the file in question is api/hist/hist_2007.html.

It's not a false positive, but it's harmless. The virus in question installs itself as a browser plugin and modifies HTML files to use said plugin. Without the virus already installed as a browser plugin, nothing happens.