From:	"Charles Sandmann" <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: can we eliminate dpmi ?
Date:	Thu, 26 Jul 2001 9:41:49
Organization:	Aspen Technology, Inc.
Lines:	21
Message-ID:	<3b5fe5dd.sandmann@clio.rice.edu>
References:	<20010726101002 DOT 32519 DOT qmail AT mailweb15 DOT rediffmail DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	dcloan.hou.aspentech.com
X-Trace:	selma.aspentech.com 996159236 13436 10.32.115.107 (26 Jul 2001 14:53:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	postmaster AT aspentech DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date:	26 Jul 2001 14:53:56 GMT
X-NewsEditor:	ED-1.5.8
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> I am making an embedded router , i have already made a protected mode
> program in assembly language program which receives and sends data packets
> in protected mode , but as routing logic is hard to implement in assembly
> lang. i will need to code it in c lang. , so i will need a 32 bit
> instructions exe generated from c , but it shouldn't use dpmi,or dos
> interrupts as my router will operate independent of os .
> 
> So can anyone guide me how can i do such thing with djgpp to say it not
> to use dpmi and generate pure bios functions using exe ?

How will this program load - in ROM or Flash?  How does control 
transfer to it?

One way I know this problem has been attacked was to do development
under DOS (including CWSDPMI).  The program "paused" itself, the
memory contents were captured.  All traces of the DOS OS were removed
from the snapshot, the memory was then stored to rom or flash and
used as the transfer point when the device was restarted.  The application
called no interrupts which would go back to DOS, but continued
to use CWSDPMI as for memory management and other features like BIOS
calls they didn't want to re-implement.

- Raw text -