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

Re: [MiNT] pdomain() inheritance?

To: mint@gfanrend.fishpool.fi (MiNT mailing list)
Subject: Re: [MiNT] pdomain() inheritance?
From: Guido Flohr <gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 16:11:15 +0100
In-reply-to: <19991111154636.A11927@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de>; from Thomas Binder on Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 03:46:36PM +0100
Mail-followup-to: mint@fishpool.com (MiNT mailing list)
References: <181maxilys@normandnet.fr> <19991111154636.A11927@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de>
Sender: owner-mint@gfanrend.fishpool.fi

On Thu, Nov 11, 1999 at 03:46:36PM +0100, Thomas Binder wrote:
> For Photoline, I'd suggest a real patch (and not a wrapper, what was
> what you suggested), i.e. see if there's room at the beginning of the
> initial routine to insert the 10 bytes requiered for a Pdomain(1) call
> in assembler (move.l #$1190001,-(sp) trap #1 addq.l #2,sp)

This may fix Photoline (or break it) but doesn't solve the general
problem.  What about a new ioctl on the proc filesystem that allows you to
change (at your own risk!) the domain of a certain process?  There are no
security concerns about that, the normal filesystem protection (the
process file is owned by the process's uid) will do.

Ciao

Guido
-- 
http://stud.uni-sb.de/~gufl0000/
mailto:gufl0000@stud.uni-sb.de

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [MiNT] pdomain() inheritance?
  - From: "Konrad M. Kokoszkiewicz" <draco@obta.uw.edu.pl>

References:
- [MiNT] pdomain() inheritance?
  - From: maxilys@normandnet.fr (Remi Villatel)
- Re: [MiNT] pdomain() inheritance?
  - From: Thomas Binder <gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de>

Prev by Date: Re: [MiNT] Pgetauid/Psetauid
Next by Date: Re: [MiNT] Memory protection and speed
Previous by thread: Re: [MiNT] pdomain() inheritance?
Next by thread: Re: [MiNT] pdomain() inheritance?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread