Date:	Sat, 28 Jul 2001 12:12:02 -0400
Message-Id:	<200107281612.MAA20431@delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: eliz set sender to eliz AT delorie DOT com using -f
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT delorie DOT com>
To:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
CC:	acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<10107281511.AA18279@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject:	Re: Make 3.791 on Windows 2000 test
References:	<10107281511 DOT AA18279 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
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

> From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
> Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 10:11:44 -0500 (CDT)
> 
> If you get a lower address, we try to address wrap.  On NT the limit set
> silently gets truncated from a 4Gb limit to a 2Gb limit

Right, I forgot about that NT subtlety.

> 2) I think we should ignore (keep allocated but not touch) any blocks which
>  are returned to us lower than the base, and try again.
> 3) We may need some way to toggle the default for testing to prevent having
>  to rebuild everything.  In the past I had an exe which binary patched all
>  the EXEs to toggle the default meaning.

Is it true that Unixy sbrk is a much better default on NT and W2K?  If
so, it might be better to change the default automatically if we can
do that without bloating the startup code.  To recognize NT, all we
have to do is call a single DOS function (3306h) and compare the
result with 0532h: if they compare equal, we are on NT/W2K.  This
doesn't sound like a lot of code, does it?

(We should still let users override this by setting bits in
__crt0_startup_flags, in case they have reasons to do so.)

- Raw text -