Mail Archives: djgpp/2004/05/28/03:46:56
> From: 048321887-0001 AT t-online DOT de (Udo Kuhnt)
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: 27 May 2004 00:35:13 -0700
>
> That is probably the reason why the task manager in DR-DOS requires SHARE to
> be loaded, but requiring SHARE is hardly a problem in this case.
I think the reason for SHARE is the same as under Windows 3.x.
> > And the latter means that just copying is not good: it is a frequent
> > case that the child closes one or more of inherited handles that it
> > doesn't need. You don't want that to invalidate the handle in the
> > parent, since existing programs don't expect such a calamity.
>
> It is not invalidated because each VM has its own set of file structures.
I wasn't talking about the case of creating a separate VM, I was
talking about X_PCreate.
> > So perhaps writing a (16-bit real-mode) program to test this aspect
> > would be a useful first step.
>
> ??? I do not see the point - DJGPP cannot produce such executables, and using
> a different compiler would make the result harder to interpret. Besides, the
> MT API in DR-DOS calls for a 32-bit implementation, so using a 16-bit test
> program would probably not work anyway.
I suggested a 16-bit executable (obviously, produced by a coompiler
other than DJGPP) because I thought it would be easier. For starters,
you avoid the complications of DPMI.
But if such a 16-bit executable cannot be built, then a DJGPP test
program is the way to go.
- Raw text -