Message-ID:	<20010114193407.538.qmail@lauras.lt>
From:	"Laurynas Biveinis" <lauras AT softhome DOT net>
Date:	Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:34:07 +0200
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Interest in Smalltalk and/or Python?
Mail-Followup-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010114162056 DOT 27414C-100000 AT is> <NEBBIOJNGMKPNOBKHCGHGEJHCAAA DOT tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.12i
In-Reply-To:	<NEBBIOJNGMKPNOBKHCGHGEJHCAAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>; from tim.van.holder@pandora.be on Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 05:11:07PM +0100
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

On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 05:11:07PM +0100, Tim Van Holder wrote:
> Annoyance! As it turns out, the latest smalltalk package requires mmap(),
> so it won't work out-of-the-box on DJGPP at all (and since I don't think
> many MSDOS environments have mmap(), also renders the MSDOS support it
> has useless).
> I'll check if there's a way to excise the mmap()-related code (smalltalk
> 1.7 didn't use it, so it might be possible); if not, I think we may be
> screwed(tm) - until we have mmap() too, that is.

I didn't see the code, but I guess that simple fallback to malloc()
will work, if it is mmap(MAP_ANONYMOUS), or mmap("/dev/zero").

Laurynas

- Raw text -