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/
