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 Jesup  writes 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