Package: manpages-dev Version: 2.39-1 The mprotect manpage specifies that:
"Whether PROT_EXEC has any effect different from PROT_READ is architecture and kernel version dependent."
which is true, but it should also specify that whether PROT_WRITE implies PROT_READ is architecture dependant and that it is the case on x86 platforms. The same holds true for the mmap manpage. However, what makes this manpage especially misleading in that regard is that it states that:
"For example, if the memory had previously been marked PROT_READ, and mprotect() is then called with prot PROT_WRITE, it will no longer be readable."
which, as I said, is not true on x86 platforms. I think would be better to reverse this sentence so as to say:
"For example, if the memory had previously been marked PROT_WRITE, and mprotect() is then called with prot PROT_READ, it will no longer be writable."
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
