Date:	Tue, 22 Apr 2003 14:42:36 +0200
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-Id:	<3942-Tue22Apr2003144236+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<3EA450CB.531C5769@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> (message from Richard
	Dawe on Mon, 21 Apr 2003 21:12:59 +0100)
Subject:	Re: nmalloc revisited
References:	<10304211942 DOT AA12379 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <3EA450CB DOT 531C5769 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
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

> Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 21:12:59 +0100
> From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
> 
> The current debug interface in CVS is compatible with Unix and Linux systems
> (see src/docs/kb/wc204.txi).

In that case, I think we should not change that interface.

> My opinion is still that nmalloc must provide the same interface as current
> CVS, to be incorporated in CVS. If it happens to provide an additional more
> fully-functioned or finely-grained interface, then that would be fine.

Agreed.  That means, to make it more clear, that it is okay to _add_
functionality, but not _replace_ the parts of it that are compatible
with other platforms.

- Raw text -