This is the problem i am facing,theoritically i think i am
clear about
it but not clear as to how to implement it.i am writing a
rotate driver
which would cheat the os about the modes suppoted by my
current
driver,i am writing this for WIndows 2000 which does not
write the modes to
the registry.
Here is the theory about what all i think.
THe Gdi(os)---->Queries My Driver about modes------->i
query the real
driver for modes supported by it for eg it replies back by
saying
i support 1024x768 and 800x600----->i tell the OS that i
support
768x1024 ,600x800,1024x768 and 800x600 —>if the os asks
me do i support say
1024x768 i ask the real driver about 768x1024 and if it
says yes i tell
the OS yes and then bitblt and other methods are called
and the
execution continues.
is this the right approach of cheating the os and
working ,if this is
the correct approach of cheating the OS about modes,i am
still not clear
which methods will do this for me DrvGetModes or
DrvAssertModes and
where should i make changes.Will i write something in the
GDIINFO
structure or do something else i am still nto very clear ,
how do i let the GDI
know that i support all the modes including the rotating
one ,i dont
have the registyr to do this for me because i am working
for win2k.
if any one can through some light on this issue or if some
one has ever
worked with soemthing liek please give a direction
.
From: Justin Frodsham
>Reply-To: “NT Developers Interest List”
>To: “NT Developers Interest List”
>Subject: [ntdev] RE: The future of the BIOS
>Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 01:23:52 -1000
>
>For IA-64, it is a done deal. It was in the firmware from day one. I
>worked for the server division BIOS group, so I don’t have any specific
>info on the IA-32 version, just vague memories from miscellaneous
>conversations about certain groups having booted it/ developed on it.
>IA-32 is hard area to move forward in. Look how long it took to get rid of
>ISA slots. Ironically we never really got rid of ISA, as it is still
>embedded in the system there are just no slots. The PS/2 ports are still
>connect via LPC ISA among other things.
>
>-Justin
>
>At 10:57 PM 3/4/2003, you wrote:
>
>>Yes, I got the EFI specification last week; all 1200+ pages of it. Any
>>word on how before adoption?
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Paul Bunn
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:17 PM
>>To: NT Developers Interest List
>>Subject: [ntdev] RE: The future of the BIOS
>>
>>
>>
>>ah… proof that it’s not just great minds that think alike
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Justin Frodsham [mailto:zeppelin@io.com]
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:03 PM
>>To: NT Developers Interest List
>>Subject: [ntdev] RE: The future of the BIOS
>>
>>It already exists…
>>
>>At 04:50 PM 3/4/2003, you wrote:
>>
>>Yep, my bad. EFI. Great stuff. No reason why Intel couldn’t come out
>>with an IA32 version of EFI then, huh ?
>>All that they’d have to do would be to have an EFI program to provide all
>>the Int services that legacy OS’s require to boot…
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Justin Frodsham [mailto:zeppelin@io.com]
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 6:33 PM
>>To: NT Developers Interest List
>>Subject: [ntdev] RE: The future of the BIOS
>>
>>It is called EFI… Extensible Firmware Interface. It is stage one of a
>>move away from legacy BIOS. It is mostly written in C and is quite
>>modular and extensible. BIOS has always been a thorn in Intel’s side.
>>There is quite a bit of politics that go on surrounding the issue, but the
>>bottom line is that they are developing a standard.
>>
>>-Justin
>>
>>PS Nicholas, Should all machines boot DOS till the end of time? EFI can
>>act like a thin OS to allow the machine to diagnosed / upgraded /
>>installed in a OS independent way.
>>
>>At 03:50 PM 3/4/2003, you wrote:
>>
>>“urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office”>
>>For a VERY advanced BIOS look at the Intel 64bit architecture. It’s a
>>mini-OS all in itself. Can manage disks, run utilities, diagnostics, copy
>>files, and a whole SDK available for running and developing ESI
>>applications.
>>It’s only natural that the IA32 platform should get similar capabilities
>>– VERY useful if you ask me, and Looooong overdue.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Nicholas Ryan [mailto:xxxxx@nryan.com]
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 5:19 PM
>>To: NT Developers Interest List
>>Subject: [ntdev] RE: The future of the BIOS
>>
>>Pardon my ignorance, but what’s the point of having a BIOS just as complex
>>as an OS? I think Phoenix and Intel are having delusions of grandeur.
>>
>>
>>- Nicholas Ryan
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Mesdaq, Ali
>>
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 4:50 PM
>>
>>To: NT Developers Interest List
>>
>>Subject: [ntdev] RE: The future of the BIOS
>>
>>I have a friend who is a senior qa engineer at phoenix and he was
>>describing that they were finishing up on a bios that sounds very familiar
>>to the one you described. This was about 2 years ago. I still haven’t seen
>>it. But basically it was going to have networking capabilities and other
>>“advanced” capabilities pre os.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>From: Jamey Kirby
>>[mailto:xxxxxmailto:xxxxx@storagecraft.com]
>>
>>Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 10:26 AM
>>
>>To: NT Developers Interest List
>>
>>Subject: [ntdev] The future of the BIOS
>>
>>All,
>>
>>I have been thinking about BIOS enhancements. From what I have heard,
>>
>>Intel has a new BIOS specification that provides advanced services for
>>
>>the BIOS such as: IP networking, graphical UI, etc…
>>
>>Are there any folks here that are working on these new BIOS
>>
>>technologies; I hear Phoenix also has a new architecture.
>>
>>Some questions that I have:
>>
>>- How close are we to seeing these new BIOS technologies surface in the
>>
>>market place?
>>
>>- Who is winning the battle of the standards; Intel, Phoenix, etc…
>>
>>I am considering doing some research and development in this area, but I
>>
>>do not want to waste my time on technologies that are not going to catch
>>
>>on in the market place.
>>
>>Any thoughts would be appreciated.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Jamey Kirby
>>
>>StorageCraft
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>—
>>
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@websense.com
>>
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>
>>—
>>
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@nryan.com
>>
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>
>>—
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ultrabac.com
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com —
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: zeppelin@io.com
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>
>>
>>—
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ultrabac.com
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com —
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: zeppelin@io.com
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>
>>
>>—
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@ultrabac.com
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com —
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@storagecraft.com
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>>—
>>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: zeppelin@io.com
>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
>
>
>
>—
>You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: xxxxx@hotmail.com
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com
_________________________________________________________________
Cricket World Cup 2003- News, Views and Match Reports.
http://server1.msn.co.in/msnspecials/worldcup03/</mailto:xxxxx>
