Message-ID:	<390C39D1.D80D3FFA@mtu-net.ru>
Date:	Sun, 30 Apr 2000 17:49:05 +0400
From:	"Alexei A. Frounze" <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en,ru
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: 3rd Try: Maybe an asm problem? (Problems linking)
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000430173245 DOT 1120A-100000 AT is>
X-Recipient:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:
> 
> > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > >
> > > No, int86 issues the INT nn instruction in protected mode.
> >
> > But the result is still the same. DOS Extender or hosting OS switches modes or
> > emulates direct INTs, if it is capable to do that. :)
> 
> Not necessarily.  Depending on the DPMI server and the underlying OS, the
> INT instruction might be handled entirely in protected mode.

DOS Extenders don't handle BIOS stuff in PMode, though. Neither CWSDPMI nor
DOS4GW nor WDOSX nor DOS32 nor 32RTM do that. Thay can't. Only Windows is
capable to do that in PMode, since it has PMode drivers for almost everything
and it can replace/hook native BIOS and DOS services.

bye.
Alexei A. Frounze
-----------------------------------------
Homepage: http://alexfru.chat.ru
Mirror:   http://members.xoom.com/alexfru

- Raw text -