🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1075@philmds.UUCP> leo@philmds.UUCP (Leo de Wit) writes:
>.. what I meant was that a
>non-multitasking machine like the ST can benefit from process
>protection too.

Agreed.

>If you want to do something
>special, OK become root and then do your stuff (very careful), then go
>back being a normal user.

OK.

>| [I, John Lindwall, said]
>|So I assume (if you were using a multi-tasking system) that you would prefer
>|NOT to have process protection?  I do not see the logic in this.
>
>No, what I meant was that I would prefer to have memory protection in
>both cases. I don't see a reason why it should be more important in the
>multitasking case. You can have lots of vulnerable processes in the
>other case as well.

Agreed.

>...IMHO the most important use for VM is not protection, not paging
>in additional memory when needed, but ... the processes being position-
>independent! Try to implement the UNIX fork() call, you know what I mean
>

Good point.

Now that we've hashed this subject out a bit I see that we seem to be in
mutual agreement!  I've really enjoyed the exchange, but I don't see any
further areas to discuss.  I've benefited by hearing your views, and I'm
sure others have as well.  Thank you.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Lindwall                            johnl@tw-rnd.SanDiego.NCR.COM
           "Above opinions are my own, not my employer's"
   Health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Lindwall                            johnl@tw-rnd.SanDiego.NCR.COM
           "Above opinions are my own, not my employer's"
   Health is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.