X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: DJGPP TSR
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 21:13:13 CST
Organization: Rice University, Houston TX
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <3c4f7bc9.sandmann@clio.rice.edu>
References: <HqH38.4137$Ni2 DOT 30570 AT news-server DOT bigpond DOT net DOT au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: clio.rice.edu
X-Trace: joe.rice.edu 1011842175 10904 128.42.105.3 (24 Jan 2002 03:16:15 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rice DOT edu
NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Jan 2002 03:16:15 GMT
X-NewsEditor: ED-1.5.9
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> > http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/doc/dpmi/api/310c01.html
> > "If the objective is only to provide resident services to real mode
> > programs, the client should use the DPMI translation service Int 31H
> > Function 0300H to invoke DOS's Int 21H Function 31H directly."

> But will even that really operate sensibly on a DPMI 0.9 implementation?
> Don't most MS implementations provide for 0.9 only?

I experimented with various DPMI 0.9 providers and some behaved fine doing
this, others didn't.  All I can suggest is try it for your environment if
you really need a TSR with lots of memory (needs to be a lot to offset
overhead of DPMI provider).