>  Other than support for memory pool sharing, what are the advantages
> of HIMEM over FDXMS ?

HIMEM supports more methods to control the A20, so it supports more PCs.
Plus HIMEM has several command line configuration possibilities more.

>  If I use XMS but not EMS, I can save some bytes in UMB (real-mode UMB) by
> using FDXMS instead of HIMEM...

How big is that difference at the moment?

>  I would add, also to have different drivers for up to 64 MB and more than
> 64 MB physical RAM. 

HIMEM supports all sizes of RAM already, but is limited to 386 and newer CPU.
For FD*XMS*, you have one "up to 64MB" version and one "unlimited" version,
and the "up to 64MB" version is smaller on disk and in RAM. You also have a
third version, FDXMS286. This works on 286 CPU and is limited to 64 MB (on
286 even 16 MB) RAM.


PS: Supporting memory pool sharing means that you have to follow the
MS style handle table data format in the "up to 4 GB" variant. Both
FD*XMS* family and the Deskwork.de variant of FD HIMEM save some DOS
RAM by not supporting memory pool sharing that way.

SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
Freedos-user mailing list

Reply via email to