Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:26:50 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: "Matt" <para AT tampabay DOT rr DOT com>
Message-Id: <3791-Sat30Jun2001162649+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <D7f%6.64346$WB1.18512448@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com>
	(para AT tampabay DOT rr DOT com)
Subject: Re: DPMI problem
References: <gbb%6.63461$WB1 DOT 18246828 AT typhoon DOT tampabay DOT rr DOT com> <3b3d0f21 DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <D7f%6.64346$WB1 DOT 18512448 AT typhoon DOT tampabay DOT rr DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: "Matt" <para AT tampabay DOT rr DOT com>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 07:23:15 GMT
> 
> ...and now my little rant
> I can't figure out why DPMI will not support the allocate_linear_memory
> call, especially when the implementation is so trivial. It might even be
> acceptable for cwsdpmi to not support this, but the DPMI server in Win9x
> doesn't support this call when the OS makes it available to Win32 apps via
> VirtualAlloc. (?!!?!)
> ...Go figure.

It's very simple: Microsoft never implemented anything beyond what
DPMI 0.9 requires.  They needed (and still need) some DPMI
functionality because the Windows kernel loads at system start time as
a DPMI client. So whatever the kernel needs to load and function is
implemented, the rest isn't.