> I take it self-modifying kernel code would have serious issues.
Seems likely :-) With hardware support, making things like this work should
be *much* easier.
> I seem to recall my attempts to run v2OS (which uses a self-modifying
> assembly code boot sequence) inside VMWare crashing badly cir
> VMware handles kernel code. You are right that x86 code can't be 100%
> virtualized
> (even at the userland level) but VMware uses a lot of nasty disgusting tricks
> in order to work around them. (For example, playing with shadow pagetables
> so that a page of modified code is run but if the cod
On 9/15/05, Troy Benjegerdes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have had similiar problems with and without kqemu. Initially, I
> thought kqemu was causing the problem.
>
> What exactly does the win2k install hack do anyway? Does it change the
> disk emulation somehow?
There have been reports of prob
I have had similiar problems with and without kqemu. Initially, I
thought kqemu was causing the problem.
What exactly does the win2k install hack do anyway? Does it change the
disk emulation somehow?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 08:00:56AM +0200, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> Do u run with or without KQEMU?
