delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann) |
Message-Id: | <10004252236.AA16846@clio.rice.edu> |
Subject: | Re: The new cwsdpmi |
To: | ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se (Martin Str|mberg) |
Date: | Tue, 25 Apr 2000 17:36:47 -0500 (CDT) |
Cc: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii) |
In-Reply-To: | <200004252015.WAA07817@father.ludd.luth.se> from "Martin Str|mberg" at Apr 25, 2000 10:15:04 PM |
X-Mailer: | ELM [version 2.5 PL2] |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> No such messages so far. But alot of hangs... Which is bad. Can't even diagnose the problem. > > You could repeat the run with CWSDOMI r4, can't you? > > Yes. It's been chugging along while I've been to work today. It still > compiling, so no hang so far (after thirteen hours of compiling) with > CWSDPMI 4. Seems to indicate something's broke in r5, or it's parameters are messed up. This is why I stress test before releasing. > Not very easily. Does the new CWSDPMI use a lot more virtual memory > than the previous version? It should use the same amount of memory as r4.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |