Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 08:42:20 CST
From: mgx!thite AT uu DOT psi DOT com (Tom Hite)
To: arrakis!thor AT uunet DOT uu DOT net, djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Subject: Re: GNU C with MSDOS/Desqview-X

>From somewhere!djgpp-request AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu Tue Oct 27 00:20:19 1992
>Received: by  mgx  (NeXT-1.0 (From Sendmail 5.52)/NeXT-2.0 (MGX 1.0))
>>id AA10809; Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:20:15 CST
>Received: from barnacle.erc.clarkson.edu by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.1.031792-PSI/PSINet)
>>id AA10439; Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:36:27 -0500
>Received: from sun.soe.clarkson.edu by barnacle.erc.clarkson.edu with SMTP (PP) 
>          id <10649-0 AT barnacle DOT erc DOT clarkson DOT edu>;
>          Tue, 27 Oct 1992 01:37:22 -0500
>Received: by sun.soe.clarkson.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05587;
>          Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:05:37 EST
>Return-Path: <arrakis!thor AT uunet DOT UU DOT NET>
>Received: from relay1.UU.NET by sun.soe.clarkson.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05583;
>          Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:05:30 EST
>Received: from isis.cs.du.edu by relay1.UU.NET 
>          with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA19099;
>          Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:07:03 -0500
>Received: by isis.cs.du.edu (5.52/DU-1.0-isis) id AA14007;
>          Mon, 26 Oct 92 22:07:42 MST
>Received: by arrakis.denver.co.us (smail2.5) id AA10872;
>          26 Oct 92 18:57:40 MST (Mon)
>Subject: Re: GNU C with MSDOS/Desqview-X
>To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
>Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 18:57:39 MST
>In-Reply-To: <9210262147 DOT AA26269 AT spc1ed3>; from "Mike Grapevine" at Oct 26, 92 2:47 pm
>X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
>Message-Id: <9210261857 DOT AA10872 AT arrakis DOT denver DOT co DOT us>
>From: arrakis!thor AT uunet DOT uu DOT net (Robert B. Hood)

[other stuff debandwidth'ed]

>One problem I had (that I *don't* seem to have writting C for MS-DOS)
>is that the resulting program is very sensitive to where pointers are
>pointing.  If you try to free a NULL pointer, for instance, you will
>get the aforementioned segmentation violation.

This is a serious bug, if true, with the standard library.   Freeing a NULL
pointer is legal and covered in the definition of the function free.

Tom Hite
thite AT micrografx DOT com