Re: some more 110h4 clues...

[itschere@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE]

Stephan Haslbeck wrote:

> I can't remember at the moment what is at offset $24 in the
> basepage - maybe this can be a clue what is going wrong.

 Obviously... :-)

> It seems that MiNT or GEM try to access a basepage that was created
> in main.c with Pexec(CREATEBASE), but then freed by Pexec(OVERLAY).
>
> I only get memory violations at startup, when starting gem.sys
> from mint.cnf with either INIT=gem.sys or GEM=gem.sys.
> With INIT=MiNTOS-init, everything works okay.

 How many getties do you run? If I start only one, evertything is fine
for me too.

 One possible explanation would be that p_vfork() attaches the parent's
basepage to the child and doesn't really copy it to something private and
leave the original attached to where it was. This way a subsequent p_exec()
would still have access to the basepage, but *not* if the parent has p_vforked
again in the meantime, attaching the basepage to the second child. Hmmm, I'm
quite uncertain about this, but maybe it can give another clue...

ciao,
TeSche
-- 
Torsten Scherer (Schiller, TeSche...), itschere@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Faculty of Technology, University of Bielefeld, Germany, Europe, Earth...
| Use any of "finger itschere@129.70.131.2-15				|
| Last updated: 14. April 1994						|