Message-ID: <38FA0AC0.32A83715@home.com> From: Robin Johnson Organization: Orbit Computers X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,af,es MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: DJGPP and Win2K References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 42 Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 18:48:31 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.113.36.103 X-Complaints-To: abuse AT home DOT net X-Trace: news1.rdc1.bc.home.com 955910911 24.113.36.103 (Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:48:31 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:48:31 PDT To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Ok, take the following example you run RHODE, open up your code, and 'Build All'. RHIDE at that stage has full file access, with only enough memory to support it, if you are using the default dos prompt settings, which auto scale the amount of memory available to suit the first program. It then calls gcc, with all of RHIDE still loaded, a chunk of memory overhead here now. gcc opens up the same source file, that RHIDE has open, possibly causing a sharing violation (WinNT was always quite strict about this), and starts compiling, dumping the code to an EXE. Here is another possible problem, because the spawn program might not have the same full access as the original program. But I think the sharing violation is the most probable thing. Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Robin Johnson wrote: > > > Just a thought on this, from something I ran into while trying to compile an > > old Turbo Pascal v7.0 program on Win2K, part of the code involved calling > > command.com to do some stuff, and then spawning a child process for a few > > other things, but I traced the crash to the moment that any child > > process tried to do any file access, it died. So just an idea to look at > > the code of SetEdit or anything, and see where it calls spawn(), or > > maybe just try something that you know will write a file. > > Any DJGPP program that can run other programs *will* call spawn at some > point. So there's no need to look at the sources to know that. > > But I'm unsure what exactly are you trying to say. Why is it important > to know whether spawn is or isn't called? Could you please elaborate? -- Robin Hugh Johnson "Robbat2" QTOD: "I used to be an idealist, but I got mugged by reality." E-Mail : robbat2 AT tesla DOT t-p-l DOT com ICQ# : 30269588 or 41961639 Home Page : http://robbat2.t-p-l.com Time Zone : Pacific Daylight (GMT - 8)