X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 10:37:41 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT gnu DOT org>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <2914-Fri28May2004103740+0300-eliz@gnu.org>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <4d201f78.0405262335.2faffca3@posting.google.com>
	(048321887-0001 AT t-online DOT de)
Subject: Re: Using DR-DOS fork in DJGPP
References: <4d201f78 DOT 0405181653 DOT 16a677b6 AT posting DOT google DOT com> <4d201f78 DOT 0405191158 DOT 63550b51 AT posting DOT google DOT com> <7704-Wed19May2004233123+0300-eliz AT gnu DOT org> <4d201f78 DOT 0405191847 DOT 6697f90d AT posting DOT google DOT com> <u3c5vbous DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <4d201f78 DOT 0405200540 DOT 307bb15a AT posting DOT google DOT com> <9743-Thu20May2004201223+0300-eliz AT gnu DOT org> <4d201f78 DOT 0405210913 DOT 26a5ffcb AT posting DOT google DOT com> <uwu33ad61 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <4d201f78 DOT 0405230527 DOT 3f17fb4b AT posting DOT google DOT com> <2719-Sun23May2004185224+0300-eliz AT gnu DOT org> <4d201f78 DOT 0405262335 DOT 2faffca3 AT posting DOT google DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: 048321887-0001 AT t-online DOT de (Udo Kuhnt)
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: 27 May 2004 00:35:13 -0700
> 
> That is probably the reason why the task manager in DR-DOS requires SHARE to
> be loaded, but requiring SHARE is hardly a problem in this case.

I think the reason for SHARE is the same as under Windows 3.x.

> > And the latter means that just copying is not good: it is a frequent
> > case that the child closes one or more of inherited handles that it
> > doesn't need.  You don't want that to invalidate the handle in the
> > parent, since existing programs don't expect such a calamity.
> 
> It is not invalidated because each VM has its own set of file structures.

I wasn't talking about the case of creating a separate VM, I was
talking about X_PCreate.

> > So perhaps writing a (16-bit real-mode) program to test this aspect
> > would be a useful first step.
> 
> ??? I do not see the point - DJGPP cannot produce such executables, and using
> a different compiler would make the result harder to interpret. Besides, the
> MT API in DR-DOS calls for a 32-bit implementation, so using a 16-bit test
> program would probably not work anyway.

I suggested a 16-bit executable (obviously, produced by a coompiler
other than DJGPP) because I thought it would be easier.  For starters,
you avoid the complications of DPMI.

But if such a 16-bit executable cannot be built, then a DJGPP test
program is the way to go.