Wols Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk> writes: > On 31/07/11 17:47, David Kastrup wrote: >> Windows 2000 (not NT-based IIRC) does not usefully employ memory >> protection IIRC, so likely Cygwin does not add all too much on top. > > Windows 2000 most definitely IS NT-based. You're thinking of Windows ME, > which is the last of the DOS7/Win9x line.
Ok. It might have been that the security implications of uninitialized memory have not caught up with NT/2000 development at that point of time. It took quite some time before Linux closed that leak, too. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
