26 Apr
2007
26 Apr
'07
4:31 p.m.
--- Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
It's the Devil's brew my friend. I'd stay clear of
all of it
< I was joshing by the way ;) >
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
On 26 Apr 2007 at 14:23, Chris M wrote:
So 3.1 (and I'm assuming here you don't mean NT 3.1)
runs in real mode, yet is multitasking? I guess I'm
tired maybe...
Wouldn't a V86 mode app be a subservient
protected
mode process thing? Why would someone want to
invoke
V86 mode in DOS (If I'm understanding you
correctly),
if it were even possible.
Because it's easier to do than on a lot of other
platforms. Consider
that DPMI servers are run on a DOS base (or did you
think that
Windows 3.1/95 was something other than a gussied-up
DPMI servier?
And there's DJGPP...) Windows NT has a V86 mode, but aside from trapping
port access via a
VDD, I don't know how you modify its memory map
easily.
The classes that go into making a dos-box are similar
to those that create the window wherein a VC++ console
app run. This much I know...
Chuck, are you
nipping at the cooking sherry again
LOL LOL.
Don't have any; if I need sherry to cook with, I use
drinkin' sherry. I would
certainly thunk Linaches has a DOS
emulator built on
top of V86 mode, but what do I know.
It does, but given the complexity of Linux, I don't
know how simple
it would be to modify it to duplicate a T2000
environment.
Cheers,
Chuck
Do You Yahoo!?
Not if I can help it.