Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:05:41 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <1659-Wed11Jun2003180540+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <3EE6A04A.765FE586@yahoo.com> (message from CBFalconer on Tue, 10
	Jun 2003 23:21:46 -0400)
Subject: Re: DJGPP 2.04 alpha 2 later in the month?
References: <3EE4EB66 DOT DF7891D2 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3EE4F833 DOT 2B67D8C0 AT yahoo DOT com> <3EE582BB DOT DEC034FA AT yahoo DOT com> <3405-Wed11Jun2003053859+0300-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> <3EE6A04A DOT 765FE586 AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 23:21:46 -0400
> From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
> > 
> > Sorry, I don't understand what you are trying to say here.  Are tyou
> > saying that every DJGPP program that uses malloc will have both
> > nmalloc.o and malldbg.o linked into it?
> 
> No.  Only if it calls something in the malloc_debug family.  That
> is why it is partitioned that way.

Thanks for clarifying.