Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 09:54:30 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
Message-Id: <7458-Sat28Jul2001095430+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <10107280530.AA16684@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject: Re: Make 3.791 on Windows 2000 test
References:  <10107280530 DOT AA16684 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
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

> From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
> Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 00:30:49 -0500 (CDT)
> 
> > eax=ff970000 ebx=ff970000 ecx=000001e9 edx=ff980000 esi=ff971210
> > ebp=000b63f4 esp=000b63cc program=d:\dj204\lib\gcc-lib\djgpp\2.953\cpp0.exe
> > cs: sel=0427  base=01e90000  limit=7e15ffff
> > ds: sel=042f  base=01e90000  limit=7e15ffff
> 
> Note the strange limit here and EAX/EBX are huge positive (negative).  This
> is a sure sign of address wrap - thus NT has returned an address block
> *LOWER* than the initial address.  We need to fix sbrk() for NT - which
> means either forcing unixy sbrk() or ignoring blocks returned less than
> the original address.

One of the first things I asked Andrew to try when this issue surfaced
was to rebuild Make with Unixy sbrk.  He did, and reported it didn't
help.

So either Andrew somehow tested that incorrectly (Andrew, could you
please recheck?), or the address wrap is not the issue here.