Re: memory protection

[Anthony Jacques <jacquesa@zetnet.co.uk>]

> >  >program) it should catch SIGSEGV and properly clean up in the handler.
> > 
> > Andreas, 
> > 
> > read again: "supposed to be MiNT friendly".
> > It means Thing is NOT behaving nice, even though it's supposed to.
> > This DOES imply it IS buggy.
>
> Even if it *does* access memory it doesn't own, it doesn't have to be
> Thing's fault. Remember, Thing is a AV-server, and AV-servers *must*
> access other processes' memory.
>
> It the AV-client puts its commandline in private memory (unfortunelately
> many do) instead of global memory, Thing will get the blame and MiNT will
> kill it although it's entirely the client's fault.

Yes, this makes it even more important that it should catch any relevent
signals and clean up nicely.

However, I doubt that Thing installs many interupt routines, so what should
it be cleaning up?

Anthony