Re: Re: [UnixOS2] libc

On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 18:05:18 +0200 (CEST), Stefan Neis wrote:

>Meanwhile I do believe that this doesn't necessarily mean breaking binary
>compatibility. Whoever thinks that it is important enough should be able
>to take existing implementations, rename them to
>fread32/fopen32/fwrite32/fseek32 and assign the "right" ordinals to those
>and everything should work fine, if I understand the concept correctly.

Ok. But then compatibility only exists in one direction: You can use
old programs with the new DLLs. Not the other way round.
Why would you do it? You only have to maintain one set of EMX DLLs and
can access all internal structures.
But on the other side you are more limited in the implementation.

So please someone explain: What good is in accessing the internal
EMX???.DLL structures of other applications? Why are you not easily
able to use EMU???.DLL?

Sebastian