X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1570932755;
	bh=WlZc/jXS2+1sN77QcPcHvt3lEPA9Q3pn1uN2K7IoS3Y=;
	h=In-Reply-To:From:Date:References:To:Subject:Message-ID;
	b=lfzlVC9q0OGNbjW6z7gS0x5lAgt/gHDX6jepCURKMyZvGIVhL/j9veQMkW0DkemYb
	ecBxGFeNHxhFfd8VRtXjCdgXjaEg6QwlSMUujXrrYcarOz/szAwC9xAKihX2D1sjEx
	A3ZUvT6Z8fZ7f1BheRFDxiWgSnK2St64xKnFTP0U=
Authentication-Results:	mxback19o.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru
Subject:	Re: cwsdpmi borland compatible? possible! (Re: [PATCH] exec: fix
	inversions in leak detection logic)
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
References:	<964e3268-2f75-ee73-ab5a-b01bf1aadb98 AT yandex DOT ru>
	<qjb14m$1kqj$1 AT gioia DOT aioe DOT org>
	<7209026e-1f1b-e590-00a3-4ed1a424cc0d AT yandex DOT ru>
	<qjfkbp$1o2c$1 AT gioia DOT aioe DOT org>
	<bd347f78-b176-6992-291c-2e542241efa1 AT yandex DOT ru>
	<d97686df-50ba-5210-519a-abd80f2d190f AT yandex DOT ru> <838sr87yty DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
	<bf9153a9-d741-d081-8dac-8c51b4789a19 AT yandex DOT ru> <83mue6lzds DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
From:	"stsp (stsp2 AT yandex DOT ru) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Message-ID:	<fef80d7d-ab54-7683-8b42-e62519db6f4e@yandex.ru>
Date:	Sun, 13 Oct 2019 05:12:34 +0300
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/68.1.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<83mue6lzds.fsf@gnu.org>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id x9D2DD22011499
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

12.10.2019 19:09, Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com] 
пишет:
> Sorry for the long delay.  Charles replied yesterday that the second
> version posted here looked harmless to him.  Here's his exact words:
>
>> The second version looked harmless to me.  Based on a flag which
>> could be set it would change the cleanup behavior slightly. [...]
>> Of course the only way to know for sure is build with it and make
>> sure it doesn't break normal test cases.

Speaking of a test-cases, I have applied this:
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/446454321/comcom32_0.1~alpha1-92-d8213e2+201910061331~ubuntu19.10.1_0.1~alpha1-93-e38f8b9+201910130128~ubuntu19.10.1.diff.gz
+#ifdef __spawn_leak_workaround
+  __spawn_flags &= ~__spawn_leak_workaround;
+#endif

... to the shell, re-built it:
https://code.launchpad.net/~dosemu2/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+files/comcom32_0.1~alpha1-93-e38f8b9+201910130128~ubuntu19.10.1_amd64.deb

... and made sure it is now possible to run
comcom32+32rtm+bc.
And that it says "no envseg" under PC-DOS.

You can use it as a test-case. But note that
not all DPMI hosts will support comcom32+32rtm+bc
at the same time, as this is really a nuclear combo.
So I expect you to be in troubles testing that.
Though the patch is so simple, you probably don't
even want to.

- Raw text -