Mail Archives: djgpp/1994/12/22/10:07:56
> I don't see why not ? If CWSDPMI implements the same services as QDPMI
> (i.e., the DPMI 0.9 spec for use by any application asking for DPMI), then
> I cannot see any problems in replacing one with the other.
QDPMI works better with DVX since it can be loaded for all sessions and
has virtually zero memory footprint until used
QDPMI has a built in extender which allows it to run some DPMI apps
which expect a built in extender (BCC for example)
CWSDPMI 0.9 does not have the built in extender, nor will it run 16-bit
DPMI apps.
If you don't use DPMI at all and don't want to, don't worry about it. V2
will dynamically load it for the duration of execution and then unload it.
This is very similar to what currently happens with GO32.
Nothing is ever easy in the PC business, is it?
- Raw text -