Sender: ml AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <33BCD739.23F21DA5@cdata.tvnet.hu>
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 1997 12:58:01 +0200
From: Molnar Laszlo <molnarl AT cdata DOT tvnet DOT hu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Memory leak in bash
References: <Pine DOT HPP DOT 3 DOT 95q DOT 970702163418 DOT 8579B-100000 AT newton DOT mathematik DOT tu-chemnitz DOT de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Robert Hoehne wrote:
> Ah!! I cannot say something about the reason(s), but I will
> say only that I had a similar problem when I tried the
> perl port (I gave up then).

When I ported 5.003 I had lots of problem with an old bash. So I did
some part of the port with the linux-to-djgpp cross compiler. But now
I'm finished the port of 5.004, and with the new bash it's possible to
build all the binaries on a plain msdos 6.22 system. I'll upload the
source and binary distribution to DJ next week. I still have to do some
documentation :(

> I was not able to run the configure script because of
> low memory (but I had 20MB real and about 40MB swap).

Here is my binary patch for bashb9.exe (based on the source patch of
Daisuke Aoyama):

0000B4DF: 7F -> 7C (I did it faster then recompiling the whole package
;-)

> There are also other things I don't understand. For instance
> why they are using such an exotic configuartion script
> instead one produced by autoconf?

As I've read in a file they use a tool called 'metaconfig' because it's
modular, and the produced scripts can be interactive (so if it does a
wrong guess, it's easy to correct).

Laszlo