Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Bart's mem 1.5

2004-04-19 Thread Arkady V.Belousov
Hi! 18-Апр-2004 19:15 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Auer) wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED]: EA> Hi, while MS Win98 MEM could be called a "standard", I do not agree with: >>b7ff81920 DOS system code >>9fff65536 DOS system code EA> Those are video buffers - even if the MCBs

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Bart's mem 1.5

2004-04-19 Thread Arkady V.Belousov
Hi! 18-Апр-2004 19:15 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Auer) wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED]: EA> Hi, while MS Win98 MEM could be called a "standard", I do not agree with: >>b7ff81920 DOS system code >>9fff65536 DOS system code EA> Those are video buffers - even if the MCBs

Re: [Freedos-devel] Re: Bart's mem 1.5

2004-04-18 Thread Bernd Blaauw
Eric Auer schreef: Hi, while MS Win98 MEM could be called a "standard", I do not agree with: b7ff81920 DOS system code 9fff65536 DOS system code wait until 1.6 is released. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored

[Freedos-devel] Re: Bart's mem 1.5

2004-04-18 Thread Eric Auer
Hi, while MS Win98 MEM could be called a "standard", I do not agree with: >b7ff81920 DOS system code >9fff65536 DOS system code Those are video buffers - even if the MCBs mark them as excluded / system code or similar, a note would definitely not hurt. For exa