From:	"Yury A. Zaitsev" <yurick AT oblik DOT dp DOT ua>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: __djgpp_map_physical_memory - some questions
Date:	Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:27:12 +0300
Organization:	Apex NCC Public InterNet News Server
Lines:	20
Message-ID:	<01ddg9.po1.ln@nix-if1>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010614111938 DOT 972T-100000 AT is>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	dialup113.apex.dp.ua
X-Trace:	main.apex.dp.ua 992646321 98347 195.24.139.113 (15 Jun 2001 23:05:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT apex DOT dp DOT ua
NNTP-Posting-Date:	15 Jun 2001 23:05:21 GMT
User-Agent:	tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (Linux/2.2.19 (i686))
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:

>> >>    So, Win9x DOS box is the best environment for DJGPP, isn't it?
>> EZ> It depends.  For some uses, plain DOS with CWSDPMI is better.
>>    Which DOS is better? Is it MS-DOS, PC-DOS, some other DOS?
EZ> What's the difference between these two?
   I think at least undocumented features are different ;).

>> EZ> If timeouts are the issue, you could use `alarm' or `setitimer' for a 
>> EZ> much better and more portable code.
>>    No, I can't use setitimer() with djgpp because setitimer() uses 
>> uclock() which doesn't works properly under win9x, when program is in
>> background mode.
EZ> uclock does work on Windows, both in fore- and background programs.
	Yes, it works. I've muddle together uclock() with usleep() :).
	
EZ> It's the timer tick interrupts that break setitimer in background:
EZ> Windows almost stops delivering interrupts to such a program.
   So, stupid loop with time() works and setitimer()/alarm() don't...

- Raw text -