From:	"John M. Aldrich" <fighteer AT cs DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: DPMI incorporation...
Date:	Fri, 27 Dec 1996 18:24:52 -0800
Organization:	Two pounds of chaos and a pinch of salt
Lines:	31
Message-ID:	<32C484F4.29A2@cs.com>
References:	<199612272249 DOT XAA13864 AT math DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Reply-To:	fighteer AT cs DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ppp110.cs.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Mark Habersack wrote:
> 
> DPMI was designed for i386+ only and it would never run on iAPX286-
> machines. DPMI heavily relies on features found only in i386+
> machines (like paged memory).

Well, of course.  This is what I was referring to.  ;)

> I don't think it'd make sense, anyway. The best use for 286 CPUs
> today is in Tekram (or similar) cacheing controllers or in advanced
> monitors. Thus 286 has virtually been 'reduced' to a level of a
> processor in embedded systems (although i386EX is taking over the
> area).

Actually, 286's and lesser computers are still widely in use in
less-developed areas of the world.  For example, I believe that there
are still restrictions on export of computer technology to the former
Soviet Union.  I had the opportunity not long ago to converse with a
representative of a company planning to design a new DOS-based OS geared
towards such customers.  Unfortunately, DJGPP was not suitable for
inclusion in this project because of the 386 restriction.

C'est la vie; progress marches on...

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| John M. Aldrich, aka Fighteer I  |        fighteer AT cs DOT com         |
| "Starting flamewars since 1993"  |   http://www.cs.com/fighteer   |
|  *** NOTICE ***  This .signature is generated randomly.           |
|                  If you don't like it, sue my computer.           |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

- Raw text -