From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <9608071821.AA10626@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: Binding CWSDPMI
To: davis AT space DOT mit DOT edu
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 13:21:34 -0600 (CDT)
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <199608071800.OAA15043@aluche.mit.edu> from "John E. Davis" at Aug 7, 96 02:00:07 pm
Content-Type: text

> This is the main reason that I will not distribute v2 executables,
> instead, I will distribute v1 produced executables.  I though that I
> might be able to get rid of v1 by distributing distribute CWSDPMI.exe;
> however, I am unable to run 16 bit apps from the application subshell
> if DPMI is provided by CWSDPMI.

I suggest you try binding with PMODE/DJ and see how well this works for you.
Since it is a single pass, it won/t try to provide DPMI services to any
sub-program.  It should be noted that V1.x images can't run 16-bit dpmi
apps in a subshell either under any DPMI provider (windows, etc), so the
right idea is just to avoid 16-bit dpmi apps :-)

Oh, there is a minor bug in pmode/dj 1.0 if you have "int86" or assembly
int instructions and are checking the return flags - this bug is not
seen when using dpmi_int.  Pmode/dj 1.1 will get released as soon as I do
a bit of testing on it.