Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 13:39:01 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Johan Venter <jventer AT writeme DOT com>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: far pointers again
In-Reply-To: <z%jK3.34130$ei1.58418@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.991005133700.4115F-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, Johan Venter wrote:

> But you are running in 32-bit protected mode, you don't need far pointers,
> because everything is near if you have a selector including it.

Everything is near, that's true, but the DS selector doesn't cover all 
the memory.  So some addresses are still inaccessible.  You need to 
either map them into the DS segment and bump up the DS limit (that's what 
the nearptr hack does), or create a separate segment, if you still want 
the memory protection.