home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.uit.no!news
- From: borgen@hstud2.cs.uit.no (B°rge N°st)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Subject: Re: OS features
- Date: 18 Jan 1996 00:14:02 GMT
- Organization: University of Tromsoe, Norway
- Message-ID: <1144.6590T1433T1016@hstud2.cs.uit.no>
- References: <92747544038@PAPA.NORTH.DE> <4b3h9s$1st@alterdial.UU.NET>
- <m4d20p0mn2v.fsf@freud.hut.fi> <4dgch8$rkf@hermes.louisville.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: hstud0.cs.uit.no
- X-Newsreader: THOR 2.22 (Amiga;TCP/IP) *UNREGISTERED*
-
- > What I was thinking was more along the lines of modifying
- >LoadSeg() to put the code segments into protected memory and everything else
- >in a public area. Obviously, flags of the above sort would/could be useful
- >for future programs.
-
- Not only useful, but bloody required.
- a) Modifying code is legal as long as cache consitency is handled.
- b) Code generation is legal (also needs cache avareness).
- c) You can have _variables_ inside the code segment!
-
- I suggested 3-4 years back that pure programs could be protected, but because
- of c) this was shot down. (The application set forth was an execution counter
- or current instances counter. Probably used by _very_ few programs so the
- idea would be worth testing.)
-
- >Usually, bad pointers to the OS point to $0 and enforcer has done wonders for
- >developers to find those (and also wonders for users to keep the system up!)
- >and I don't see why enforcer type protection shouldn't be added to the OS.
-
- You could add protection of free memory today without any major applications
- breaking. MungWall is the only one that comes to my mind, but that is kinda
- ok as it tries to perform the same task.
-
-