Scribit Bas Wijnen dies 28/04/2006 hora 11:34: > > Yeah, but as I said, in some systems that encapsulation is obviously > > broken. > So you are suggesting we should build a broken system, because others > have done so as well? I don't think I like that approach. ;-)
I said I'm not so sure we break encapsulation here. If you consider that spawning a process is clearly an action you ask the outside world (like it is in POSIX), then it's not breaking encapsulation. In Coyotos and HurdNG, where spawning a process could be no more than giving some of your own resources ot something you start yourself, then it would break encapsulation. It's a matter of paradigm and semantic. > For example, I think it is likely that a user's session manager will > not allow listing of its processes (at least not to anyone except the > user). That means that others (including the system administrator) > cannot see what programs the user is running. And that's a good thing, > privacy-wise. I agree. I don't want my mom, connected with SSH to her account on my system, know I'm executing 'xine ~/Porn/hotbabes.mpg' or a friend of mine, connected as I am on a GNU's or Debian's infrastructure's system, know I'm executing 'gvim software-patents-directive-take2.tex'. ;-) That has always bothered me, when I'm doing some distant administration work on someone else's system, to see what he is doing when I do some top or ps. Privately, Nowhere man -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
