[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GEM and memory protection

To: Julian Reschke-FJR010 <Julian_Reschke-FJR010@email.mot.com>
Subject: Re: GEM and memory protection
From: Frank Naumann <fnaumann@prinz-atm.cs.Uni-Magdeburg.DE>
Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 17:44:03 +0200 (MESZ)
Cc: "draco@mi.com.pl" <draco@mi.com.pl>, "jacquesa@zetnet.co.uk" <jacquesa@zetnet.co.uk>, "mint@atari.archive.umich.edu" <mint@atari.archive.umich.edu>
In-reply-to: <35696D45.D9E422B7@email.mot.com>

Hi!

> > That would be a reasonable compromise (IMHO) between an unreal dream (full
> > protection) and hard reality (no protection).
> 
> I really have a problem here: it means that correctly written programs
> are
> punished (real MP is taking away), just because some other programmers
> don't code properly.

I agree with Julian. This isn't a the answer to this problem.
 

Tschuess
   ...Frank

--
ATARI FALCON 040
--------------------------------------
Internet: fnaumann@cs.uni-magdeburg.de
Mausnet:  Frank Naumann @ L2

References:
- Re: GEM and memory protection
  - From: Julian Reschke-FJR010 <Julian_Reschke-FJR010@email.mot.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Virtual Memory (Was Re: Kernel 1.14.7 available)
Next by Date: Re: Apostrophe in argv
Previous by thread: Re: GEM and memory protection
Next by thread: Re: GEM and memory protection
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread