PLoP as DOS USB Driver

Hi everyone,

I've browsed around and read that 'PLoP' can be used as
a Read-Only DOS USB driver but i couldn't find a real-life
tested configuration sample to serve as a model for my
own experiments... I've reached a point where 'PLoP' is
loaded and finds my USB Flash drive but then the closest
it gets to a promissing result is when i see this message
in what seems to be 40 x 16 CGA resolution:

NO ROM BASIC
System Halted

I've tried both using 'GrUB4DOS' launched via 'Config.SYS'
and 'BootLace', i also tried using 'SysLinux' from a bootable
FreeDOS diskette after configuring 'PLoP' as indicated on
the author's web site (Int19h) but it's still not clear to me
what i'm not doing right which leads to a stall or reboot...

I think that the use of PLoP as DOS driver is still experimental, it may work on your PC or it may not.

The instructions are not difficult to follow:
http://www.plop.at/e...anager.html#drv

The general idea is to load the PLoP BEFORE DOS, not after it, as you seem you are doing.

In grub4dos:

title Load PLoP plpbt.bin
kernel /plpbt.bin

title Now start DOS
chainloader /io.sys

You choose first entry, the plpbt.bin (already configured for int 19 work through plpcfgbt) should load and remain resident, and you should get back to grub4dos, where you choose second entry.

jaclaz

Hi JacLaz,

It seems the answer lies in this word: experimental... I've
disconnected the card-reader and used USB thumb-drives
only for my test. A read-only drive got created as planned
using this easily reversible setup which works the same as
a permanent one implemented via 'BootLace':


'Config.SYS':
Device=C:\GrUB4DOS\GrUB.EXE
Device=C:\WINDOWS\HiMem.SYS
Device=C:\WINDOWS\EMM386.EXE NoEMS RAM
DOS=High,UMB


'Menu.LST':
title Use PLoP as a DOS Driver
kernel /PLPBti19.BIN

title Get back to DOS
quit


Connecting my card-reader to the legacy USB v1.1 outlet
where i plugged my USB thumb-drives caused the same
error as i reported before but this time i noticed 'PLoP' is
warning about unloading the driver... To me this points at
a HardWare "compatibility" issue. Thanks for your advice,
i'll now try to determine if there's a problem with my USB
5-ports PCI card as well!

which works the same as
a permanent one implemented via 'BootLace':

Well, no.

You think it works the same, I personally doubt it does.

There is no way to prove it unless you try another way.

I am trying to convince you to try NOT loading DOS before the PLoP loader, as we don't know if anything you load (DOS itself, Himem, Emm386, whatever) remains somehow "sticky" and prevents loading the PLoP properly.

Loading DOS BEFORE is NOT what PLoP's Author suggested: mind you, it may work or be the same, but why not try it the way it is described?

More generally, what is the point in asking for suggestions and later avoid following them?



jaclaz

Dear JacLaz,

Somehow i was expecting to get an agressive response
from you again. Please re-read attentively the 1st post:

I've tried both using 'GrUB4DOS' launched via
'Config.SYS' and 'BootLace'...

That means i also tested the configuration you suggest.

What's the point of replying to posts which make you so
unhappy?

Thanks and merry holydays anyway.

I am not at all unhappy.

And wasn't meaning to be aggressive.

I was replying EXACTLY to what you stated:

using this easily reversible setup which works the same as
a permanent one implemented via 'BootLace':

And that is EXACTLY the point where we have different opinions.

Different ways of loading grub4dos (i.e. grldr vs. grub.exe) do in some cases makes a difference.

See here for a (diametrally opposite) example:
http://www.boot-land...?...ic=9882&hl=

I suggested you a possible test, you seemed like doing a different thing, EXACTLY as stated:

Loading DOS BEFORE is NOT what PLoP's Author suggested: mind you, it may work or be the same, but why not try it the way it is described?

jaclaz

Hi JacLaz,

In the very 1st post i thought i had made it clear i've tried
both ways: 1) launching 'GrUB4DOS' via 'BootLace' would
imply a permanent installation where 'PLoP' gets loaded by
'GrUB' 1st, 2) launching 'GrUB4DOS' via 'Config.SYS' where
DOS gets loaded 1st... By writing - and i quote again - that:

Bi> I've tried both using 'GrUB4DOS' launched via
Bi> 'Config.SYS' and 'BootLace'...

Euh... I guess the average reader who's familiar with this
subject can only conclude that i did try both methods, e.g.
"before" and "after". Yet, this was your reaction:

JL> The general idea is to load the PLoP BEFORE DOS,
JL> not after it, as you seem you are doing.

That's where the whole thing became a bit "confused" so i
tried to straighten it up by adding this other statement:

Bi> A read-only drive got created as planned using this
Bi> easily reversible setup which works the same as a
Bi> permanent one implemented via 'BootLace'...

To which you replied:

JL> You think it works the same, I personally doubt it does.
JL> There is no way to prove it unless you try another way.

At which point i suggested you re-read my 1st post and made
it clear that contrary to your belief i did test those two ways!...



I may be mistaking about your state of mind but i don't see
how one could still be under the impression that i didn't
proceed with my tests just like you suggested ('PLoP' 1st);
i did try 'PLop' 1st, that's not a matter of opinion, it's only
a fact which you still don't seem prepared to accept but i
could be mistaking about that as well... If you're not being
"agressive" then please submit a proper expression so i can
appreciate the complex nuances of the English language! In
any case, i'm not avoiding anything - i thought i was trying
to be pre-emptive, actually... Anyway, happy new year!...



Perhaps next time, in 2010, we can discuss how i solved my
problem about loading 'PureOS-Light' on that particular PC.

If you're not being
"agressive" then please submit a proper expression so i can
appreciate the complex nuances of the English language!

Would "extremely doubtful" do?
(mainly because you cannot "launch" grub4dos through "bootlace", you can use bootlace to "install" grldr.mbr to the MBR or modify the bootsector so that it loads grldr - and the two may give different results)

In any case, i'm not avoiding anything - i thought i was trying
to be pre-emptive, actually... Anyway, happy new year!...

Happy new year (late as always) to you too.

Perhaps next time, in 2010, we can discuss how i solved my
problem about loading 'PureOS-Light' on that particular PC.

Sure .



jaclaz

Thanks, i had noticed how 'BootLace' works but thanks anyway.

Since you're back on-line and i have you attention i wonder if
you wouldn't have a comment or two to make about this:

http://www.boot-land...?...ost&p=88386

I trust you'll make it an entertaining response!