Hi!
14-Фев-2005 13:59 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Devore) wrote to
[email protected]:
>> >> nasty process. HIMEM is not comparable to a simple device driver or TSR.
>> I think, this is too hard suggestion. :) Of course, XMS is used in many
>>programs (including DOS itself), but HIMEM itself is not overcomplex (in
>>compare with other device drivers and TSRs).
MD> So you're volunteering to do it?
"it" == implementing of en-/disabling XMS from commandline? I think,
this is not the worsted feature, but its usage is much limited to very
specific tasks. And no, I not volunteering for it. :)
MD> I stand by my assertion that it is both
MD> difficult and unnecessary. Not to mention how bad it would get if EMM386
MD> gets loaded in conjunction and must be unrolled.
_If_ some driver/program uses HMA/XMS (including EMM386), then, of
course, disabling should be rejected. Unrolling EMM386? Hm. Probably, this
is possible, but really hard task (especially because protected mode should
be turned back to real mode).
MD> MemTest doesn't need
MD> this, there are easier ways to deal with the situation.
Here I agreed. :) My objection was only against quoted sentence (about
himem incomparability with other (simple) drivers/TSRs).
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
