Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:07:54 -0400
Message-Id: <200009141507.LAA04685@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200009140446.GAA28575@lws256.lu.erisoft.se> (message from Martin
	Stromberg on Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:46:39 +0200 (MET DST))
Subject: Re: (fwd) startup-code
References:  <200009140446 DOT GAA28575 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
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


> So the use in dpmiexcp.c is correct? Wouldn't it be better if the
> symbol was named "_end" or "__end"? Is it possible to change?

The existence of both end and _end is historical and typical of older
unix platforms.