Date:	Tue, 1 Nov 1994 12:05:03 +0100
Alternate-Recipient:	Allowed
From:	Hartmut Schirmer <HSC AT xaphod DOT e-technik DOT uni-kiel DOT d400 DOT de>
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Subject:	Re: C++ misc suggestions / queries
Reply-To:	hsc AT xaphod DOT e-technik DOT uni-kiel DOT d400 DOT de

> >   DEVICE=C:\DOS\EMM386.EXE NOEMS X=C800-C9FF
> >
> > Commented this out and demacs came up fine!  Now... what have I lost
> > by doing this?
>
> Why would anybody working with DOS 6.x put ``NOEMS'' on the EMM386
> line?  I would say it's a left-over from DOS 5.0, where Expanded
> and Extended memories (sic) were managed with two distinct pools,
> and so whoever wanted max XMS had to be deprived of EMS.  In DOS
> 6 this is no more the case, AFAIK.  Do I miss something here?

Well, you'll miss 64K (EMS-Frame) + 5K (EMS-Driver) of memory.
Use NOFRAME instead of NOEMS and most extender (incl. emx) will be
happy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hartmut Schirmer                                          ___   _____
Technische Fakult"at, Univertit"at Kiel           /\     |   \    |
Kaiserstr. 2, D-24143 Kiel, Germay               /  \    |    |   |
Phone: +49-(0)431-77572-245   FAX: -285         /____\   |__ /    |
e-mail: hsc AT e-technik DOT uni-kiel DOT de              /      \  |   \    |
                                              /        \ |    \   |
               Lehrstuhl f"ur Automatisierungs- und Regelungstechnik

- Raw text -