Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!bellcore!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!UOTTAWA.BITNET!451061 From: 451061@UOTTAWA.BITNET (Valentin Pepelea) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Minix, Unix on the Amiga... Message-ID: <8908082312.AA10140@jade.berkeley.edu> Date: 8 Aug 89 23:05:39 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Lines: 22 Randell Jesupwrites in Message-ID: <7570@cbmvax.UUCP> > Not to say some resource tracking wouldn't be a bad idea. However, > in a multitasking, lightweight process machine you have to be careful: many > programs pass off resources (permanently) to other processes (or to no one: > public structures, for example.) One can't merely add freeing of resources > on program exit to current programs; they'll break. How about a new flag for the memory allocation routines? If resource tracking is to be implemented, MEMF_NOTRACK would guarantee a memory block which would not be tracked, and therefore not be deallocated when the program exits. This would be a modifier flag like MEMF_CLEAR and MEMF_LARGEST, not a descriptor flag like MEMF_CHIP, MEMF_FAST, MEMF_PHYSICAL and MEMF_VIRTUAL. :-) Valentin _________________________________________________________________________ "An operating system without Name: Valentin Pepelea virtual memory is an operating Phonet: (613) 231-7476 system without virtue." Bitnet: 451061@Uottawa.bitnet Usenet: Use cunyvm.cuny.edu gate - Ancient Inca Proverb Planet: 451061@acadvm1.UOttawa.CA