X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	"Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email AT xnothavet DOT cqm>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Is this a bug in crt1.c?
Date:	Fri, 11 Apr 2014 06:45:22 -0400
Organization:	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines:	46
Message-ID:	<op.xd5etwkg6zenlw@localhost>
References:	<op DOT xd4ntjft6zenlw AT localhost>
	<201404110126 DOT s3B1Q0R8020183 AT delorie DOT com> <op DOT xd44buvg6zenlw AT localhost>
	<83y4zctgrr DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT aioe DOT org
User-Agent:	Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux)
X-Notice:	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Bytes:	2706
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 04:24:56 -0400, Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT gnu DOT org> wrote:
> From: "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email AT xnothavet DOT cqm>
>> On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 21:26:00 -0400, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

>>> The stub sets up the psp_selector field to be a PM selector.
>>
>> Correct.  I asked about env_selector, not psp_selector.
>
> Right, and DJ explained that psp_selector, which is used to get the
> value of env_selector, is set up to be the PM selector.

Correct.

> Therefore, env_selector is suitable to be the 1st arg of movedata.

Sigh, that is exactly what I asked about.
This is also where you've lost me.

Your answer doesn't explain how/where/when it's converted.
His answer doesn't explain how/where/when it's converted.

I didn't read the link he provided at first since it appeared to:
  1) be provided in reference to psp_selector
  2) not be related in any way whatsoever to conversion of env_selector
  3) appeared to only be about the switch to protected mode
  4) not be related to any issue other than initial CS, DS selector setup

His provided link does explain where environment selector is converted.

That answer is that it's created in the initial DPMI entry point call.

So, that has now answered exactly *HALF* the asked question ...

I'm not sure whether to thank him for that or not since he didn't bother
to explain why I needed to reread that.  I'm sorry that I overlooked that
or ignored it multiple times.  Of course, that would explain why I asked
and why the link appeared to be of no use whatsoever to me.

I'm not going to ask you two for the other *HALF* of the question.
I suspect that doing so would do irreparable damage to my psyche.
If someone else wants to reply, thank you for that.  Otherwise:

Later,


Rod Pemberton

- Raw text -