Re: Re: NFS packet blocking (Was Mouse EXPLOIT info...)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Perry E. Metzger: "I would suggest..."
• Previous message: Perry E. Metzger: "Re: NYT Article this morning"
• Maybe in reply to: Timothy Newsham: "Re: NFS packet blocking (Was Mouse EXPLOIT info...)"
• Next in thread: Jas: "Re: NFS packet blocking (Was Mouse EXPLOIT info...)"

Pete wrote:

>> Solaris 2 crashes alot

My copy of 2.3 doesn't.

Karl wrote:

>Solaris 2 is still pretty new code - I know the SVR4 code has been around
>a long time but Sun have made many major changes to it, I'm sure.  Given the
>complexity of the kernel and the age of the code, they probably havent done
>too badly.

I was rather amused in reading the Sunsoft book _Expert C Programming
(deep C secrets)_ by Peter Van Der Linden claiming in his capacity as a
senior programmer to have seen Sun run Lint against the AT&T code and come
up with some 10,000 lint errors, all of which were allegedly fixed.  At
this point, Sun says their kernel lints clean, and I have no reason to
doubt it.

We have an AT&T SVR4 or two on campus, and they are LOUSY OS's; they make
Solaris *2.1* look like a wonder of reliability.


As for security, I agree with Karl; I have yet to see a Unix that meets
my criteria of "secure", bar none.

• Next message: Perry E. Metzger: "I would suggest..."
• Previous message: Perry E. Metzger: "Re: NYT Article this morning"
• Maybe in reply to: Timothy Newsham: "Re: NFS packet blocking (Was Mouse EXPLOIT info...)"
• Next in thread: Jas: "Re: NFS packet blocking (Was Mouse EXPLOIT info...)"