Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1998/04/21/06:07:54
Date sent: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 11:42:38 +0200
From: Vik Heyndrickx <Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be>
Subject: Re: Temporary files for gcc-2.81
> Andris Pavenis wrote:
> > The best solution would be to implement some PID that would good enough.
> [snip]
> > So I can mention some possiblities with my comments:
> > - _my_cs - Is not usable under Win95. If I start 2 DOS sessions and
> ...
> > - base address of _my_cs selector accessible through
> ...
> > - reading time (biostime()). Perhaps this is only slightly better than nothing
> ...
>
> There was recently a discussion about what would be a good PID here at
> d-w (mainly under the subject of the temp functions).
Yes I read this discussion.
Note about second variant (base address of _my_cs): Ok under Win95,
returns the identical value for different DOS sessions under NT 4.0 -
so we can throw away also this variant.
> I have a perfectly working and tested PID code available, but I need to
> know whether it is acceptable to put that code in the stub (it really,
> really, really needs to run in real-mode). Question is: is every
> coff-image started with a stub, i.e. can a coff image been run without
> one? I've been writing my own stub.asm (nearly 1/3 finished) but started
> wondering then.
>
In which systems have You tested the PID code? (The tests should cover
all the systems in which DJGPP is usable: I have used it in DOS, Win95
and in DOS 6.22 under DOSEMU in Linux, perhaps other poeple can have
something more).
Andris
- Raw text -