Re: EMX problem

From	"A.D. Fundum" <what.ever@neverm.ind>
Message-ID	<o8uYFJ3iqTdG-pn2-XZ7x3OfL9dPs@localhost> (permalink)
Newsgroups	comp.os.os2.programmer.misc
Subject	Re: EMX problem
References	<fV45K0OBJxbE-pn2-Po0DVV9WtXII@localhost> <fV45K0OBJxbE-pn2-UW9Gwdgwbd4f@localhost> <slrnipjvr6.kmq.nospam-abuse@powdermilk.math.berkeley.edu> <fV45K0OBJxbE-pn2-T1if6jK8e8Ni@localhost>
Organization	News-Service.com
Date	2011-04-06 13:24 +0200

Show all headers | View raw

 >> When porting, I always use -Zstack 8000; this way, the stack
 >> overflows are first caught by the Unix porters, not by me.

 > Nice one. 

No, it isn't. It perhaps could be a nice one if you, a.o., forget the 
whole "ignoring bugs"-part of it, like Ilya always likes to do. And 
you stopped caring about the idea of using reasonable sizes, what may 
cause problems.


--

Back to comp.os.os2.programmer.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: EMX problem "Dave Saville" <dave@invalid.invalid> - 2011-04-03 20:31 +0000
  Re: EMX problem Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-04-04 17:27 +0000
    Re: EMX problem "Dave Saville" <dave@invalid.invalid> - 2011-04-04 19:01 +0000
      Re: EMX problem Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-04-04 21:30 +0000
        Re: EMX problem "Dave Saville" <dave@invalid.invalid> - 2011-04-05 13:43 +0000
          Re: EMX problem Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-04-05 18:55 +0000
      Re: EMX problem "A.D. Fundum" <what.ever@neverm.ind> - 2011-04-06 13:24 +0200

csiph-web