Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:56:52 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
cc: Bill Currie <billc AT blackmagic DOT tait DOT co DOT nz>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: cwsdpmi r4 beta
In-Reply-To: <9710142149.AA15152@clio.rice.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.971015125149.17868B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 14 Oct 1997, Charles Sandmann wrote:

> > >  VDS development implementation in source distribution
> > Is that virtual DMA?
> 
> Yes.  Chris Matrakidis did most of the coding.  It's still in development,
> and the distributed binaries don't contain it since it's not fully tested.
> It's a real good start on implementing the VDS standard, but I hesitate to
> turn it all on until it's fully tested and as compatible with the version
> under Win (and other DPMis) as possible. 

I suggest to make two (three, counting CWSDPR0) binaries, and only have 
the VDS support in one of them, even when it is fully tested.  That way, 
only those programs/users which need DMA will load the VDS-supporting 
host or stubedit the .exe to load it.  It seems reasonable, since VDS 
support probably enlarges the footprint, and many programs, particularly 
those which run deeply-nested children, like Make, don't need DMA at all.

> There is a need  to get a quick r4 with new license terms before the
> next CDROM (I had promised it would be done last weekend...)

Relax, I'm doing the CD-ROM stuff, and I don't think I will need r4
released before another week or two pass.  We only need r4 because of
the redistribution terms, no features are required.

I know RMS sounds like we need it yesterday, but he keeps telling that
about the CD job since April, and didn't want to wait for me to port
some more GNU stuff because of that.  Which didn't prevent him from
asking me to put the CD aside for a while and work on the pretest of
Emacs 20 (which ate up another 2 months).