Jump to content
146 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

@terry, ah ok. just thought it could not be too old because its slashdotted today. well next time i look at the date :gathering:

 

i think you'll all be interested in this one..

 

http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20060117081618155

 

Wow, this is amazing!!

 

Have you already tested it? I would like to know about the speed. :(

@terry, ah ok. just thought it could not be too old because its slashdotted today. well next time i look at the date :D

Wow, this is amazing!!

 

Have you already tested it? I would like to know about the speed. :)

On a fast PC (Athlon 64) and Windows/Linux as host only DOS or Windows95 are usable as guest OS, everything else is too slow.

On the website from Wintel they show XP but I can't believe that this is running fine.

Edited by DrJägermeister
AFAIK, Bochs is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from being really usable.

 

yes, but with Yonah, You don't need the PPC to Intel translation anymore. If this should be the case, It will run much faster.

 

Could it be that the Mac EFI is programmed to ONLY recognise HFS+ disks as bootable and not ISO9660, FAT32 and NTFS?

 

No, I don't think so, because EFI needs a hidden fat32 Partition for itself.

Edited by xtraa
yes, but with Yonah, You don't need the PPC>Intel translation. If this should be the case, It will run much faster.

 

 

 

No, I don't think so, because EFI needs a hidden fat32 Partition for itself.

Bochs is slower than you'd believe, even on x86. Even QEMU+KQEMU is a bit too sow for me... But at least it is tolerable, basically.

Bochs is slower than you'd believe, even on x86. Even QEMU+KQEMU is a bit too sow for me... But at least it is tolerable, basically.

 

thats too bad... a fast emu would be very helpful. :pirate2:

 

But can you explain one thing for me: I really wonder, what they want to emulate!? I mean the hardware is 100% compatible. This is like running PearPC on a mac.

It does not.

 

Well actually it does:

 

- An Interface between the Operating System and the platform firmware

- Provides for multiple CPU architectures support

- EFI uses disk storage with a specific FAT file system, identified by a specific FAT type and NVRAM storage

- Introduces a new GUID Partition Table (GPT) [GUID = Globally Unique Identifier]

- Allows legacy MBR methods (boot and partitioning)

 

But that's just how Intel describes EFI specifications. If you have newer infos, call Intel and surprise them :)

'Uses' does not imply 'requires'.

 

EFI, as implemented on the currently shipping Macintosh systems, does not 'need a hidden fat32 Partition for itself.'

 

 

Yes, thats what terry sais, too. And I wish that you are right.

 

But take a look at this:

 

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?s=...indpost&p=44511

 

Now, in the boot chain graphic (the second), you see step three, the EFI OS Loader.

 

And in the first picture, see the little blue Square located in the Harddisk that sais also EFI OS Loader.

 

Now thats what made me thougt, it is a "must have", not a "can be" :weight_lift:

Edited by xtraa
  • 3 weeks later...
Yes, thats what terry sais, too. And I wish that you are right.

 

But take a look at this:

 

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?s=...indpost&p=44511

 

Now, in the boot chain graphic (the second), you see step three, the EFI OS Loader.

 

And in the first picture, see the little blue Square located in the Harddisk that sais also EFI OS Loader.

 

Now thats what made me thougt, it is a "must have", not a "can be" :happymac:

 

Ooh, it's a blue square in a purple oblong, all wrapped up in a PowerPoint presentation. It must be real!

 

Seriously; the ESP is something that *can* be used. However if you were to actually *look* at one on a real Apple system, you would find that the OS loader is read off the HFS+ root filesystem. And you can nuke the ESP and things still work.

×
×
  • Create New...