Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 10:03:45 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199709121403.KAA19349@delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: baldo AT chasque DOT apc DOT org
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <3.0.1.32.19970912052940.0069aaf8@chasque.apc.org>
	(baldo AT chasque DOT apc DOT org)
Subject: Re: 32bit DOS.
Precedence: bulk


> It must let the programer a good control of the machine.

Of course!  32-bit mode without protection (well, unless you ask for
it) - full hardware access!  That's what DOS *is*.

> Also, what it would do when an old 16 bit api or for example an old
> DJGPP api is executed?

The idea is that the OS is 32-bit, and it creates a V86 box in which
it provides a compatible 16-bit API, so that it can run 16-bit
programs.  However, the OS, being in flat memory, can include DPMI,
cache, CD-ROM, etc without taking up conventional memory, and it would
just "know" about other types of executables.

> It would have to emulate conventional memory, xms, and ems.

Yup.

> I think also that compatibility with windows 95 must be necessary
> (run in the same hard disk). What about drivespace? I use it.

I don't recall stating this as a goal.  I, for one, don't give a whit
about Win95 running.  If that's what you want, run Win95 instead.
Win95 doesn't support a case-sensitive file system, which would be the
first thing I'd make incompatible if I were to rewrite DOS.