--- "K.S. Bhaskar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If GT.M works at all on OS X, I would expect it the compiler to run > unchanged. This is because while GT.M generates object files in a > standard format, it uses its own dynamic loader. Maybe. Obviously, habing your own linker makes a big difference, but what is not obvious to me (due to my ignorance of Mach) is that the operating system interfaces will be compatible, even if the "high-level" system calls (fork, dup, sbrk, etc.) I'll have to check the developer documentation when I get a chance and see what I can learn. My guess, though, is that if your run BSD over Mach, the fact that schuduling (say) is handled by the microkernel would not be visible at the VM level, and if thazt's the case Bhaskar may well be right here. (I'm certainly no expert.) > > In Ismet's case, I suspect that the 1h is coming from some mismatch > having to do with terminal characteristics on the server side (e.g., > libncurses). I wonder if something like "stty sane" before going > into > GT.M might make a difference. > I'm sure you're right. The thread forked but there's been no exec (new subject line) as yet. :-) === Gregory Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Mathematics is the science of patterns." --Lynn Arthur Steen, 1988 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
