X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<48D3B01F DOT 5080200 AT oracle DOT com> <9721D18815A74E3790E86A5BC19A461A AT collinsdirect DOT com> <48D74687 DOT 80002 AT oracle DOT com> <B932A0FA75EB4E3791300D2E33218FE8 AT collinsdirect DOT com> <48D83EF8 DOT 5040401 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <29E315C686404A6D8696F355E283DD56 AT collinsdirect DOT com> <48D8F8AC DOT F1774B58 AT dessent DOT net> <124BDC78EB534CE084916FC3E6C2A96B AT collinsdirect DOT com> <48D93F9A DOT 12855EB9 AT dessent DOT net>
Subject:	RE: [OT] polite response to polite response - Brian...
Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:31:21 -0400
Message-ID:	<5C7A26A2AC4E47E8BC7664ACCBD46360@collinsdirect.com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To:	<48D93F9A.12855EB9@dessent.net>
From:	Barry Smith at SourceLink <barrysmith DOT sourcelink AT gmail DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Brian:

-(And please, it's spelled Cygwin, not CygWIN.) 
*grin* Sorry. I usually use all lowercase, aka "cygwin."

I was merely pointing out (subtly and repetitively) that 
cygwin is an application layer on top of Windows.
Further, I was trying to point out that it's okay to use
Windows programs on a Windows computer.

Last, I was trying to hint that if you can call Windows 
Programs from cywin, and let Windows manage them, and you 
get a success (re: unzip) then by all means do it the way 
that works.

After all, the goal is to get it to work. *smile*

Barry Smith

-----Original Message-----
From: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com [mailto:cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com] On Behalf Of
Brian Dessent
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 3:12 PM
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [OT] polite response to polite response - Brian...

Barry Smith at SourceLink wrote:

> > That doesn't mean that 'run' was at fault.
> Yet it could have been at fault, or the cygwin memory allocation could 
> be at fault, or Windoze, or the tool that you're RUN-ing.

The "Cygwin memory allocation" most certainly could not be at fault, nor
could the tool being run.  Again, the one and only thing that is culpable
when a BSOD occurs is code running in kernel mode.  Any attempt from
user-space to do anything untoward simply results in a software fault, with
a default handler installed by the OS which terminates the process if it
does not handle the fault itself.  Thus the very worst a process can ever do
is get itself terminated.  Anything more is simply not possible, as enforced
by the processor which is running in protected mode.

That's not to say that a BSOD cannot result from the action of running
user-space code, but when it does the underlying reason for the BSOD cannot
possibly be in the user-space code, it must be a bug in kernel-mode code
because by definition it is charged with disallowing any process from
destabilizing the system, and it has failed.

(And please, it's spelled Cygwin, not CygWIN.)

Brian

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -