On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 12:08:42 -0500 Paul Schuster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:27:15 -0400, Peter Relson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :> :>>OK, I'll bite. Why do you "need to determine"? :>> :>>If you have any reason to think that the page is protected (presumably :>>because you did it or might have done it), then you can just unprotect it. :>>A page does not need to be protected in order to successfully unprotect. :>>Note that protection is not a "count" it is a "toggle". Two protects :>>followed by one unprotect leaves the page not protected.. :>The need is based on stuff that can be put into key-0 CSA -or- into dynamic :>LPA during install time, and is briefly updated after it has been put into :>CSA or dynamic LPA. Since the dynamic LPA is protected, it needs to be :>unprotected and then reprotected, but the CSA needs neither. Hence the :>'need to determine'. I wonder if ASM/VSM checks for modified page-protected LPA. -- Binyamin Dissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
