Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/05/09/14:26:02
| Message-ID: | <004401c0d8a5$820d7f60$0c4011d4@telekabel.at>
|
| From: | "Brian Chance" <Killerbunny AT seductive DOT com>
|
| To: | "DJGPP Delorie Mailing List" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
|
| Subject: | Re: DPMI
|
| Date: | Wed, 9 May 2001 18:31:32 +0200
|
| MIME-Version: | 1.0
|
| X-Priority: | 3
|
| X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal
|
| X-Mailer: | Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
|
| X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
|
| Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C0D8B6.45858680
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: DPMI
> [Please don't post in HTML.]
D'oh! Considering this current e-mail isn't in HTML, it won't happen =
again.
Promise. ;)
> On Tue, 8 May 2001, Brian Chance wrote:
>
> > I realize that Djgpp links its output natively to load the DPMI =
server
> > for protected mode compatibility. Is it possible to produce files =
which
> > are independant of DPMI with Djgpp?
>
> DPMI is used not only for entering the protected mode, but also for
> all system calls issued by the low-level library functions. Memory
> allocation, file I/O (including reading the program into extended
> memory from its .exe file), hooking hardware interrupts, support for
> debugging programs--all these and more are handled via DPMI services,
> because issuing real-mode interrupts from a protected-mode program is
> a tricky business.
Stuff such as interrupts and Filesystem specifications aren't
really relevant to me, actually i'd much rather know if its possible to
write a program in DJGPP for pure protected mode without the need
of DPMI.
> If you remove DPMI, you will have to rewrite all that low-level stuff
> (or give up the functions which need it).
So basically the answer is "Yes", though i'd lose all Dos and =
higher-level
operating ability? Well i know what DPMI's responsibilities are, and
this isn't as bad as it sounds, mainly most of the important functions
that i need can be rewritten (eg. Memory mapped I/O display output).
<PS. I tried formatting this one as well as i could, maybe it was a
mess-up of the CR/LF's in my e-mail client? ... Or maybe Outlook
Express just doesn't like humans.
------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C0D8B6.45858680
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR>----- Original Message =
-----<BR>Sent:=20
Wednesday, May 09, 2001 12:47 PM<BR>Subject: Re: DPMI<BR><BR><BR>> =
[Please=20
don't post in HTML.]<BR><BR>D'oh! Considering this current e-mail =
isn't in=20
HTML, it won't happen again.<BR>Promise. ;)<BR><BR>> On Tue, 8 May =
2001,=20
Brian Chance wrote:<BR>><BR>> > I realize that Djgpp =
links its=20
output natively to load the DPMI server<BR>> > for protected mode=20
compatibility. Is it possible to produce files which<BR>> > are=20
independant of DPMI with Djgpp?<BR>><BR>> DPMI is used not only =
for=20
entering the protected mode, but also for<BR>> all system calls =
issued by the=20
low-level library functions. Memory<BR>> allocation, file I/O=20
(including reading the program into extended<BR>> memory from its =
.exe file),=20
hooking hardware interrupts, support for<BR>> debugging programs--all =
these=20
and more are handled via DPMI services,<BR>> because issuing =
real-mode=20
interrupts from a protected-mode program is<BR>> a tricky=20
business.<BR><BR>Stuff such as interrupts and Filesystem specifications=20
aren't<BR>really relevant to me, actually i'd much rather know if its =
possible=20
to<BR>write a program in DJGPP for pure protected mode without the =
need<BR>of=20
DPMI.<BR><BR> > If you remove DPMI, you will have to rewrite all =
that=20
low-level stuff<BR>> (or give up the functions which need =
it).<BR><BR>So=20
basically the answer is "Yes", though i'd lose all Dos and=20
higher-level<BR>operating ability? Well i know what DPMI's =
responsibilities are,=20
and<BR>this isn't as bad as it sounds, mainly most of the important=20
functions<BR>that i need can be rewritten (eg. Memory mapped I/O display =
output).<BR><PS. I tried formatting this one as well as i could, =
maybe it was=20
a<BR>mess-up of the CR/LF's in my e-mail client? ... Or maybe =
Outlook<BR>Express=20
just doesn't like humans.<BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C0D8B6.45858680--
- Raw text -