>Does anyone else agree with me that direct int 10 access is a mistake? >Wouldn't access through a device driver be a bit more unixy? It would >be able to prevent multiple processes from trying to access int 10 services. I totally agree with this. An int 0x10 solution is *so* DOS, with the main benefit to the dev file being mentioned above. Ross
- NanoX version 0.3 released Greg Haerr
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Louis P. Santillan
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Hans-Joachim Baader
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Eric J. Korpela
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Luke (boo) Farrar
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Louis P. Santillan
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Alistair Riddoch
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Shane Kerr
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Alan Cox
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Greg Haerr
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Ross Vandegrift
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Greg Haerr
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Eric J. Korpela
- Re: NanoX version 0.3 released Alistair Riddoch
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Greg Haerr
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Greg Haerr
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Greg Haerr
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Shane Kerr
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released David Murn
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Riley Williams
- RE: NanoX version 0.3 released Greg Haerr
