X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:47:44 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT gnu DOT org>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <7105-Wed30Jun2004194744+0300-eliz@gnu.org>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <354933d6.0406300341.6ecf16ef@posting.google.com>
	(gohyongkwang AT hotmail DOT com)
Subject: Re: Which OS more suited for using DJGPP: Win98SE or WinME?
References:  <354933d6 DOT 0406300341 DOT 6ecf16ef AT posting DOT google 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: gohyongkwang AT hotmail DOT com (Goh, Yong Kwang)
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: 30 Jun 2004 04:41:24 -0700
> 
> Since WinME has already taken out DOS 16 real-mode support, does it
> cripple or affect programming with DJGPP and running programs
> generated by DJGPP's C compiler?

No, it doesn't.

> Is it safer and more trouble-free to stick with Win98SE instead?

98SE is better than ME as an OS.  So I'd suggest to stick with 98,
although you probably won't see much difference DJGPP-wise.

> Apparently, I saw a couple of postings in this newsgroup from users on
> WinME complaining they run into a whole lot of trouble trying to get
> WinME to work with DJGPP.

People are complaining about having a lot of trouble trying to get ME
to do _anything_ useful.

> I maybe writing programs that attempts to access BIOS and memory
> directly using assembly languages or calling int86 function in C. Plus
> fiddling in good old DEBUG.COM.

That would work in ME and 98SE alike, AFAIK.

My recommendation is to use 98SE.