Mail Archives: djgpp/2009/05/22/17:30:30

X-Authentication-Warning: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: Rugxulo <rugxulo AT gmail DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Increasing area for variable storage
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 14:17:43 -0700 (PDT)
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <>
References: <0KJY00585R208H10 AT mta5 DOT srv DOT hcvlny DOT cv DOT net> <4A16081D DOT 4E9E7855 AT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: 1243027063 17905 (22 May 2009 21:17:43 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 21:17:43 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info:; posting-host=;
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.64 (Windows NT 6.0; U; en) Presto/2.1.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com


On May 21, 9:04=A0pm, CBFalconer <cbfalco DOT  DOT  DOT  AT yahoo DOT com> wrote:
> Ethan Rosenberg wrote:
> > I am running DOS 7.1 [the DOS that underlies Windows98]. =A0The
> > computer does NOT have Windows installed on it.
> > I have a program that had a size of 228,038 bytes and ran perfectly
> > in the past. =A0When I added some more code, increasing the size to
> > 241,134 bytes I get a SIGSEGV error when I attempt to initialize a
> > variable. =A0The routine was scanned with Splint, which showed no
> > errors. When I removed some code, it again ran perfectly. =A0My feeling
> > is that I have overrun the boundary of the area in which the values
> > of the variables, or possibly the variables themselves, are stored.
> > How do I increase these area(s)?
> Run win98 and run your program in its DOS box. =A0If its a DJGPP
> program it can use all of your memory.

I don't think that's right. (If Eli wasn't so busy, he'd probably
explain better.) While I haven't used Win9x in years, and when I did I
was much younger / dumber (although I'm still quite wimpy), I think
I've read that even with it set to Auto or -1, you still are maxed out
at 64 MB of DPMI. Heck, Win9x itself only can handle (with hacks) 1 GB
or so of total RAM. You'd have a bigger problem finding drivers for
new hardware (USB, SATA) or running certain apps. Most people (grrrr)
have (or soon will have) dropped Win9x compatibility by now, no thanks
to MS dropping it:  Firefox, Pelles C, Abiword, F-Prot, Cygwin. So
much for a stable API (most apps barely support Win2k also, if even,
what gives??). And now XP is officially deprecated, Vista is the child
no one talks about, and Win7 is only a potential success because of
the exaggerated (never-to-be-fulfilled) hype. Even the beloved XPM (XP
Mode) inside VPC is only for non-Home users, and that requires VT-X
and will be slow. But at least your old apps will run. (Sigh)
Compatibility is just a lost art.

- Raw text -

  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019