Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010531155342.03889f98@ks.teknowledge.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 16:01:21 -0700
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
From: Randall R Schulz <rrschulz@cris.com>
Subject: Re: Addressing Layout in 1.3.x
In-Reply-To: <20010531175843.B26180@redhat.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20010531132733.03877550@ks.teknowledge.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20010531090143.0263bf78@ks.teknowledge.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20010531090143.0263bf78@ks.teknowledge.com>
 <20010531150106.O23914@redhat.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20010531132733.03877550@ks.teknowledge.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Chris,

OK. That is pretty much what I expected, but an XSB emulator hacker out 
there was having problems that seemed like the could possibly have been 
related to addressing issues of this sort, so I said I'd investigate. I 
guess that the only reason I had any suspicion was some vague hunch based 
on the existence of the "heap_chunk_in_mb" registry entry--perhaps just 
it's granularity.

Thanks for taking the time to figure out what I was after.

Randall Schulz
Mountain View, CA USA


At 14:58 2001-05-31, you wrote:
>On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 02:08:21PM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> >Chris,
> >
> >Let me try asking it this way...
> >
> > ...
> >
> >Does that clarify my question?
>
>Slightly, but the answer is still "I don't know".  We're using the Win32
>API.  We don't interact with the OS in any way other than through the
>OS, with the exception being that we do manipulate the stack in strange
>ways for signals.  We've done this since 1.1.4 or so.
>
>So, none of what you have mentioned above should have any bearing on
>normal cygwin operation in any version of Cygwin from B16.0 on.
>
>cgf


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple