X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10205161727.AA12999@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: Re[2]: emacs under w2k
To:	lauras AT softhome DOT net
Date:	Thu, 16 May 2002 12:27:58 -0500 (CDT)
Cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
In-Reply-To:	<1628097373.20020516190709@softhome.net> from "Laurynas Biveinis" at May 16, 2002 07:07:09 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version:	1.0
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

> > I think it's just killed, no traceback, no nothin'.  You just get
> > kicked back to the shell prompt (or, if you started Emacs from
> > START->>RUN, the DOS box closes).

> > Laurynas, is this true in your case?

> Yes.

I hate it when that happens.  NTVDM bugs.  The more you can tell us
about where it dies, and the state when it dies (size of sbrk request,
current sbrk point, etc) are helpful.

> > It would be interesting to see if clearing that caused it to behave
> > better (with the refresh fix to sbrk()...)
> 
> Well, I've tried. When I run resulting emacs binary, I get this error
> box every time:
> 
> X#=0D, CS=01A7 IP=00001254. The NTVDM CPU has encountered an unhandled
> exception

In the same place, or earlier?  It's not clear to me if the refresh
is making this better or worse; and if the unixy sbrk() flag  makes this
better or worse in either case.  Oh wait, EMACS does that dump thing,
so unixy sbrk() will really be a requirement unless someone stops that
insanity at least for initial dumps. :-)  Since it has it's own malloc()
it just might require unixy sbrk() anyway.  So nothing would surprise me.

> This is with refreshed 2.03, maybe there was a sbrk() fix after the
> refresh release?

No newer sbrk().  What's in the refresh was actually mostly sitting on
my hard drive from a long time ago, waiting for the time to merge it
back into the main branch and test it.  I really haven't messed with
sbrk() much since last July or so.

Someplace on a backup CD I have an sbrk() test program, but I may have
to just re-write it.  I'd like to try the sbrk() flags on Win2K and
see if it's just badly behaved, or if there is something else emacs
does which irritates NTVDM.

- Raw text -