Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!nntp.et.byu.edu!news.caldera.com!park.uvsc.edu!usenet
From: Terry Lambert <terry@cs.weber.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.sys.intel
Subject: Re: I have one thing to say about Windows '95 & FreeBSD
Date: 11 Sep 1995 00:49:40 GMT
Organization: Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <430134$218@park.uvsc.edu>
References: <41gceu$i14@mirv.unsw.edu.au> <41m3at$vn7@lucy.swin.edu.au> <MICHAELV.95Sep7002950@MindBender.HeadCandy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hecate.artisoft.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:6035 comp.sys.intel:48283
michaelv@MindBender.HeadCandy.com (Michael L. VanLoon) wrote:
] I would classify Windows 95 as barely "fully protect-mode" as you
] put it. And as a server I wouldnt trusted . Would you trust a unix system
] where any application can write all over the VM space?
]
] You can't write "all over the VM space" in Windows 95. It's memory
] protection may be less than ideal, but your summary is hardly
] accurate.
For the pages whom the program would destroy, it first calls map.
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.