From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT father DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Pharlap 286
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:02:37 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: University of Lulea, Sweden
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <996663757.365465@queeg.ludd.luth.se>
References: <68C4CF842BD2D411AC1600902740B6DA02CDC45D AT mcoexc02 DOT mlm DOT maxtor DOT com> <3b5df3e1 DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <996052472 DOT 673367 AT queeg DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> <3b5edd8f DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <996153636 DOT 755884 AT queeg DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> <3b5fe932 DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
X-Trace: news.luth.se 996663757 12039 130.240.16.109 (1 Aug 2001 11:02:37 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT luth DOT se
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-981225 ("Volcane") (UNIX) (SunOS/4.1.4 (sun4m))
Cache-Post-Path: queeg.ludd.luth.se!unknown AT father DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se
X-Cache: nntpcache 2.4.0b5 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> wrote:
: time.  The DPMI 1.0 fix for this would be to have separate IDTs
: for each client (a whole new can of worms).

Why would that be a problem?


Right,

							MartinS