Message-Id: <199804211108.NAA56468@ieva06.lanet.lv>
From: "Andris Pavenis" <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>
To: Vik Heyndrickx <Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 13:07:00 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Temporary files for gcc-2.81
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <353C6A0E.D68@rug.ac.be>
Precedence: bulk

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