[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib

To: MiNT mailing list <mint@fishpool.com>
Subject: Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib
From: "Guido Flohr" <gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de>
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 18:21:36 +0200
In-reply-to: <37366C87.B11A7233@lpg.fi>; from Juhani Sivusalo on Mon, May 10, 1999 at 08:20:07AM +0300
Mail-followup-to: MiNT mailing list <mint@fishpool.com>
References: <E10fU5N-0005C0-00@gfanrend.fishpool.fi> <373283BA.C7A65ED5@lpg.fi> <19990507200434.B270@zowee.rz.uni-sb.de> <37366C87.B11A7233@lpg.fi>
Sender: owner-mint@fishpool.com

On Mon, May 10, 1999 at 08:20:07AM +0300, Juhani Sivusalo wrote:
> > Can you still reproduce the effect?  It would certainly be very helpful if
> > we found out the reason for that strange behaviour.
> 
> I think you should see "TERM is not set" with Pine if you set stack size to 0.

That sounds logical.  Probably the lexical analyzer wants more stack.

BTW, I've tried to fix the stack problem a little bit but it didn't help.
I've included some stack checking into alloca() but it usually isn't used
at all (because alloca is a gcc builtin function).  I guess we have to
live with that until MiNT is able to remap the stack on overflow.

Ciao

Guido
-- 
http://stud.uni-sb.de/~gufl0000
mailto:gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de

References:
- Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib
  - From: thomas.goirand@easynet.fr (Thomas GOIRAND)
- Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib
  - From: "Juhani Sivusalo" <jsivusalo@lpg.fi>
- Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib
  - From: "Guido Flohr" <gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de>
- Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib
  - From: "Juhani Sivusalo" <jsivusalo@lpg.fi>

Prev by Date: RE: [MiNT] MiNTLib 0.51
Next by Date: [MiNT] Changes for utmp records
Previous by thread: Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib
Next by thread: Re: [MiNT] Porting with MiNTlib
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread