Linux-Advocacy Digest #903, Volume #33 Wed, 25 Apr 01 07:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (John T. Kennedy)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested! (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Scout")
Re: Windows 2000 is Cool (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: MIcrosoft: Words, denial and WTF! (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows 2000 Rocks! (Karel Jansens)
Re: Winvocates confuse me - d'oh! (Karel Jansens)
Re: Winvocates confuse me - d'oh! (Karel Jansens)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (Craig Kelley)
Re: Intel versus Sparc (mlw)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John T. Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
soc.men,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 05:11:25 -0400
I was a little bit frightened when Lynette Warren
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: Last night I had the strangest
dream...
>Scott Erb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Hey, she passed her CPA exam the first try,
>
>Sounds like an intelligent woman.
>
>> works full time, and we share household
>> chores completely.
>
>So, Scott, when she wises up, as smart women tend to do in time, and
>she realizes what a scam American feminism truly is, are you going to
>dump her because she's outgrown your ideology?
I think folks are taking Dr. Erb's supposed commitment to principle,
any principle, a wee bit too seriously.
You're all assuming there is some reliable correspondence between what
he says and what he does, but I find that supposition unsupportable.
-
John Thomas Kennedy III
The Wild Shall Ever Wild Remain!
http://www.mindspring.com/~jtkennedy/itswhatitisnow.html
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 05:19:25 -0400
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >>> I don't know about other people, but the repulsive feelings I have
> >>> about it are pratty damned instinctual...
> >>>
> >>> The first time I ever heard of it, (mentioned in a medical textbook)
> >>> my thought was, OH, GROSS!...
> >>
> >>And your point is?
> >>
> >>-Ed
>
>
> > homosexuality is not genetic, it is a choice.
>
> Doesn't seem like Aaron has much choice in the matter. He's hetrosexual
> and there's bugger all he can do about it. I am exactly the same. I have
> no choice in the matter.
Genetic defect.
>
>
> > The feelings we have about it are for self-preservation of our species,
> > and they are right.
>
> Right for what?
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
>
> u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Subject: Re: Aaron Kuklis Arrested!
Date: 25 Apr 2001 07:44:12 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kelsey Bjarnason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Matthew Gardiner"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What possible benefits does HTML have over normal text? Apart from being
>> able to click on a click and the browser automatically loads?
>
>Several, actually, including, for example, some degree of layout control,
>the ability to highlight important items, to define headings, etc, etc.
>
>I know, I know, the idea of allowing users to have flexible control over
>things like layout and appearance is anethema to the folks who are all
>for allowing users to have flexible control over things like OS settings.
> Go figger.
First of all, HTML is not intended for layout, but (as the name implies)
for text markup. It are people who insist that HTML is ment for layout
who present us with web pages consisting of lots of junk that demand
properties of the browser so the page can be reasonably viewed. Flexible
control over layout via HTML? Flash maybe, not HTML.
Secondly, even though I oppose HTML in email (I am not very amused by
colorful backgrounds and blinking text), it is valid because it is a
valid mimetype as described in RFCs 2045-2049. Can you point me to an
RFC that describes anything but standard text in USENET? Draft RFC
maybe?
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP key 0xD61A655D
Beauty is irrelevant.
-- Seven of Nine, stardate 51186.2
------------------------------
From: "Scout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 14:19:40 -0400
"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 09:55:54 -0700, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 24 Apr 2001 12:57:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
> >
> >>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:12:05 -0700, Gunner © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >>>On 23 Apr 2001 19:27:50 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>The government should protect people from danger.
> >>>>Isn't that why people should pay for the army?
> >>>
> >>>Wrong. No one is going to pay to give you your own guardian angel. We
> >>>pay for the military to keep other nations from destroying our nation.
> >>
> >>Is that not a danger? Is that not protection?
> >
> >Sure is, to the nation. However..courts have held consistently, that the
> >State has no obligation to protect the Individual.
>
> Protecting the nation is protecting the individuals.
No....it is not.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 is Cool
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:19:20 +1200
Ray Chason wrote:
>
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> +------------------------+
> >> | PLEASE |
> >> | |
> >> | Do not feed the troll. |
> >> | Thank you. |
> >> | |
> >> | The Management |
> >> +----------+ +----------+
> >> | |
> >> | |
> >> | |
> >> | |
> >> | |
> >> * () ( * )(| @( )( * %@ )
> >> ( )( ))( || (|)| )( )((
> >> --------------------------
> >
> >
> >Is this sign GPL'd?
>
> BSD'd. WTF, it's not like I can make any money from it anyway.
>
> --
> --------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
> PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
> Delenda est Windoze
You will probably see that in Microsoft software soon.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MIcrosoft: Words, denial and WTF!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:20:27 +1200
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > You show your self off as an even bigger idiot. As I remember
> > correctly, service packs for Windows 2000 would strictly be
> > patches/fixes etc. etc., unlike the NT 4 service packs that included not
> > only patches/fixes but new tools as well. This "minor detail" was
> > mentioned prior to the release of Windows 2000 when Microsoft change how
> > they were going to release patches/fixes.
>
> Yes, indeed. But the term Service Pack is already being used. Why change
> it? You'd much rather speculate about consipiracies than consider Occam's
> razor.
>
> > As for you Juvenile comment regarding 810 and xfree, support has been in
> > Linux since SuSE Linux 7, and might have been also included with
> > Mandrake 7.2 as well.
>
> And it's still irrelevant to the point, which is that it has nothing to do
> with XFree, unlike you claimed.
>
> > So, before you start swing from the chandlers, double check you
> > comments, or else you will nominate yourself as the newsgroup idiot.
>
> What's a chandler?
It is a fancy light fitting.
>
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner
> >
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > Matthew exposes himself as the idiot he is. In his zeal to "expose" the
> > > conspiracy of wording, his ignorance of the words "vulnerability" and
> > > "Service" are shown. Never mind the fact that MS uses the term "hot
> fix"
> > > for interim patches (between service packs).
> > >
> > > The real reason it's called a "Service pack" is that it often includes
> new
> > > features, and not just fixes. For instance, One NT4 service pack
> included a
> > > new form of threading called "Fibers" (similar to Posix threads).
> > >
> > > All this coming from the guy that thought the i810 GART issues were
> simply
> > > "fixed" by a new version of XFree. He doesn't even know much about his
> OS
> > > of choice, how can he be making any credible statements about any other
> OS?
> > >
> > > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Yes, this is another look at the Microsoft machine and the arrogance
> it
> > > > displays. First of all, this all MHO, no more, no less, however, most
> > > > Linux advocates and ex-windows users probably agree with me.
> > > >
> > > > Patches, bug fixes, service packs, normal words in the world of
> > > > computing, no OS are immune to bugs and problems, however, how one
> word
> > > > these problems is an interesting topic.
> > > >
> > > > Lets look at the SUN, a UNIX power house, they refer to Solaris OS
> > > > updates and bug fixes, as "patches". Thus telling the public, there
> have
> > > > been some errors in the Solaris (or what ever) product, and here are
> > > > some files to correct the problem, and on top of that, here are some
> new
> > > > features. Lotus refers to these files as either fixes or patches, thus
> > > > going along the same line as SUN for the reasoning, both have taken
> > > > responsibility for the errors.
> > > >
> > > > Now we come to Microsoft, who don't call them "patches" or "fixes",
> but
> > > > "service packs", thus avoiding the admittance that maybe in one of
> their
> > > > products there is a bug. Talk to a Microsoft rep. and they prefer to
> > > > call it an "update", as if to say to the customer that it enhances the
> > > > reliability even more, whilst making sure they don't mention the fact
> > > > that they (Microsoft) were too sloppy to ensure that there weren't any
> > > > bugs in the original code.
> > > >
> > > > Security alerts are even more hilarious, they are not referred to as
> > > > "security holes" or "bugs", instead they are called "security
> > > > vulnerabilities", thus offloading the responsibility for "creating the
> > > > hole" on the shoulders of hackers/crackers/script kiddies, instead of
> > > > taking the responsibility themselves for the error.
> > > >
> > > > The arrogance goes further than mear words, it heads into their
> > > > advertising, there customer service, the whole company culture that
> > > > surrounds Microsoft. You ring up Microsoft because Visual Basic 6
> (with
> > > > latest service packs) doesn't work with Microsoft Office 2000, the
> first
> > > > question you get asked it how you are going to pay for the support! I
> > > > shelled out $350 fucking dollars, why the hell should I shell out even
> > > > more money to line Bill Gates Pockets? I paid for the software, I want
> > > > the support that goes with it. Compare that to SUN, I have a copy of
> > > > SUN Forte Developer 6, I didn't even have a support contract with SUN
> > > > and they still helped me, so it definitely shows where each companies
> > > > priorities lye.
> > > >
> > > > Office XP, yet another over hyped, under performing suite. The people
> I
> > > > know, who kept with Lotus Smart Suite are quite happy about the fact
> > > > that they aren't on the upgrade tread mill, and the cost of it has
> > > > stayed constant, and in some cases gone down since the original
> > > > purchase. Compare what you get for $NZ300, Lotus Smart Suite,
> > > > w/Database, Browser, Wordprocessor, etc etc, compared to Microsoft's
> > > > $1300 suite which does the same thing! when are people going to wake
> up
> > > > to the hype, its a black hole, sucking users in with the promise of
> > > > enhanced productivity, however, once sucked in, and have relised that
> it
> > > > has not delivered, they dare not tell anyone of their stupid decision,
> > > > and they stick with Office, even though Corel Wordperfect Suite 2002,
> > > > Lotus Smart Suite 2000, or StarOffice could have achieved the same
> feats
> > > > at 1/10th the price.
> > > >
> > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Disclaimer:
> > > >
> > > > I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
> > > >
> > > > If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
> > > >
> > > > Running SuSE Linux 7.1
> > > >
> > > > The best of German engineering, now in software form
> >
> > --
> > Disclaimer:
> >
> > I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
> >
> > If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
> >
> > Running SuSE Linux 7.1
> >
> > The best of German engineering, now in software form
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:39:11 +1200
Hullo wrote:
>
> So you run Linux because you are a poor dude?
>
Could you give me $2400 for a copy of Windows 2000 Pro and Office XP?
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 Rocks!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 12:00:59 +0000
Neil Cerutti wrote:
>
> WJP posted:
> >ISTR with my Apple //e a quasi-GUI called "Geos". This would
> >have been circa 1984. I had a devil of a time getting that
> >installed on the 10meg HD. Can't be sure, as my memory of late
> >is frequently porous.
>
> I ran GEOS on my C64, also.
>
> And again in 1994 (then called Geoworks) on my dad's Gateway PC
> running Win95. He had a friend at work that was a Geos junky and
> gave him a CD to try out. Complete replacement desktop and
> application suite, though I thought the applications were more on
> the level of Microsoft Works than StarOffice or Lotus SmartSuite.
>
> I wonder if it's still being sold?
>
> Hmmm. A quick net search says, yeah. The company now sells a
> suite of software and servers for Application Service Providers.
>
It's called "NewDeal Office" these days.
It's a pity it took them so long to get a decent spreadsheet for the
environment (in early days they bundled Quattro Pro 3.0 for DOS with it.
Pretty silly to have an integrated environment you have to leave to do
some spreadsheeting), or I might still be running it.
I tried NewDeal under OS/2 and was amazed at the speed of the thing. I
even installed it - briefly - on an old 286 laptop hanging around and it
appeared just as speedy. I guess that's assembly for you <G>.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates confuse me - d'oh!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 12:19:28 +0000
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> And I hope you realize that NT/2K are completely different in that
> they are fully 32-bit from the get-go. No DOS at all (except as a small
> sub-system for compatibility, just like the OS/2 subsystem and POSIX
> subsystem).
>
OS/2 does not have a DOS "subsystem". It creates a VDM in which it runs
a full-fledged version of DOS, any version one wants, actually. Running
WinOS/2 in a separate session relied on this feature: Every Win app had
its own PC to fu... er... play with, and only the errant session got
hosed when the inevitable crash came.
Isn't NT smart enough to create VDMs?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates confuse me - d'oh!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 12:25:52 +0000
Donn Miller wrote:
>
> [x-posted to COMNA to generate flame wa-, I mean discussion.]
>
> Now, I don't think you can even boot into DOS with Windows ME. Wonder
> why? What is the motivation for preventing people from shutting Windows
> down and running DOS by itself? Of course, one could always dual-boot
> with some other version of DOS (perferably Caldera OpenDOS), but
> still...
>
Didn't someone come up with a hack to run win95 in a DR-DOS (Caldera
changed the name back, BTW) terminal?
And if not, someone should. It would be extremely kewl.
>
> But does NT really operate the vid drivers in Ring 0? That sounds like
> Windows 98 to me. (Aaron's favorite OS.) I know NT's video drivers run
> in kernel space, but I thought they were still restricted to ring level
> 2.
>
Ring 0 has been ordained from Above.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:53:48 +1200
> > Well one thing that really chaps me is the state to which the profession
> > of grocery bagging has fallen. Grocery bagging used to be an honored
> > skilled job for many a high school and college student. It is an
> > art that requires proper techniques of load balancing and weight
> > distribution. Cokes don't go on top of bread and eggs, etc. etc.
> >
> > At least in the town I live in, grocery baggers have become a pathetic
> > breed of pea-brained gorillas who couldn't load a decent bag of
> > groceries if their life depended on it. A monkey from the zoo
> > could bag groceries better than these neandrethals they have
> > working the local grocery stores.
>
> Now THERE's an idea....
>
> ...and they work for peanuts!
When I was at University, I worked at a place called "Pak 'n Save", and
the customer had to pack their stuff, I simply put the items in the
shopping cart, and it was their choice to either use a re-usable bag,
buy a plastic bag at 5 cents each, or use an empty coke box.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: 25 Apr 2001 05:05:53 -0600
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > For the record, I managed to get things working as non-Administrator. I
> > > already had C:\WINNT readable/executable by Everyone, and I enabled
> > > loadable drivers per your suggestion. Thanks.
> >
> > You can do the same thing under Linux:
> >
> > chmod a+rxs /sbin/insmod /sbin/rmmod
> >
> > Of course, that's not always thought of as a smart thing to do...
>
> But you claimed this couldn't be done. You called me a liar, saying
> that Nero and EZCD would refuse to run if you weren't an
> administrator.
I said no such thing (you are thinking of someone else?)
> But now you are accepting that it can be done, without retracting
> your statements?
Your soluiton is not acceptable for a multi-user PC, although it may
be one step better than giving the administrator password out. I
don't know what I should retract...
> > The NT advocates used to brag that NT lacked "insecure" set-uid flags
> > for executables. I remember in the days of NT 3.5x and early 4.0
> > reading gloat after gloat about how insecure UNIX was compared to NT.
>
> Well, many Unixes at the time were much more insecure. Things have
> changed quite a bit, and setuid is now fairly safe if you are
> careful and run only well audited programs as setuid (of course, as
> we've seen with BIND, that can still leave you quite open).
s/BIND/$ANY_SERVICE_ANY_OS/g
> > Now, in order to use a scanner or cdrw program, you need to give all
> > users the authority to insert kernel-code whenever they want to.
>
> As I've said a dozen times so far. No. This only allows you to load an
> already installed driver. It does not allow you to install your own
> drivers.
>
> > Hmmm, I wonder if the DRIVERS folder is rxwrxwrxw (too lazy to go and
> > check).
>
> Simply putting a driver in the directory doesn't make it installed. You
> have to modify the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE registry, which is only modifiable by
> an adminstrator.
I was thinking more of:
move my_evil_file drivers/atapi.sys
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Intel versus Sparc
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 07:11:27 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:13:51 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 17:09:19 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> ...
> >> >the stack to the point where it either corrupts the heap or crosses a protected
> >> >boundary. Remember programming 101 where you saw of the stack grows down and
> >> >the heap grows up?
> >>
> >> Impossible with a properly set up MMU. The stack and heaps are not
> >> contiguous.
> >
> >Not true, that depends on layout.
> >
> >On the x86, process space is 32 bit, usually this space is divided in two,
> >upper 2G goes to system, lower 2G goes to process. Lately, however, lower 3G
> >has been mapped to user and upper 1G mapped to system.
> >
>
> The entire 2GB isn't mapped. Unless you've got a swapfile that big, it is
> impossible for the stack to run into the heap.
That depends on the layout of he process. If the stack is close to the heap,
and you only have a few dead VM pages between bottom of stack and top of heap,
pushing a large structure can get well past it.
In a program on most x86 systems, I can put the stack where ever I like. Also,
think of threads, where does their stack come from? It is largely based on the
preferred layout of the build tools.
Lastly, on the x86, in a flat model protected environment using virtual memory,
a process is laid out in a 4G space. Only a small fraction of it is used. This
does not mean it is not laid on in the page directory as pointed to by the CR3
register. The 4G space must be defined. It just need not be very populated.
Perhaps there is some confusion of what "mapped" means and in what context.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
