Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 09:39:07 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Cc: DJGPP developers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: Opinion
In-Reply-To: <9607270609.AA13817@clio.rice.edu>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960728093151.23430M-100000@is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Sat, 27 Jul 1996, Charles Sandmann wrote:

> Now that PMODE/DJ is getting a shakedown (and some improvements for V1.1) it
> looks like it will be superior in every way to the CWSDPMI ring 0 version
> in the next release.  Because of this, I plan to remove CWSDPR0.EXE from
> the r3 release (which will make the binary distribution a bit smaller) and
> recommend use of PMODE/DJ for ring 0 usage.  Do you see any problems with this
> reasoning?

If leaving CWSDPR0 alone doesn't impose any burden, I say leave it 
there.  Why remove something that's been already done?  I can imagine 
some app in the future that just needs CWSDPR0 and cannot work with PMODE 
(with any luck, this could just happen within 5 hours of releasing r3 ;-).

>  If there are any
> features you ever considered (or wanted bugfixes), ask now, since this will
> probably be the last "feature" release (and hopefully the last release)
> of the silly thing.

How about an environment variable that, when set, will cause CWSDPMI to
print on exit all kinds of statistics about the client?  Maximum memory
usage, number of page faults, internal CWSDPMI memory usage (to give a
clue on how close one is to exhausting the CWSDPMI heap)--anything that
can be of any use.  That should make diagnostics a lot easier.