In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gustavo V G C Rios writes: : All other tasks would run in like any other user process, like a fyle : system daemon, process daemon , internet daemon (not inetd), and, of : course, device drivers programs. This still won't stop you from wedging the machine absoltely solid by programming a chip on the PCI bus in a bad way which hangs the PCI bus. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel really stable ... Alfred Perlstein
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel really st... Gustavo V G C Rios
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel reall... Alfred Perlstein
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel r... Gustavo V G C Rios
- Re: Is traditional unixes kern... Kenneth Wayne Culver
- Re: Is traditional unixes kern... Nick Sayer
- Re: Is traditional unixes... Gustavo V G C Rios
- Re: Is traditional un... Andrew Reilly
- Re: Is traditional unixes kern... Ronald G. Minnich
- Re: Is traditional unixes kern... Wes Peters
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel r... Warner Losh
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel really stable ... Matthew Dillon
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel really st... Alfred Perlstein
- RE: Is traditional unixes kernel really stable ... Daniel O'Connor
- RE: Is traditional unixes kernel really stable ... Yevmenkin, Maksim N, CSCIO
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel really st... Gustavo V G C Rios
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel reall... Ugen Antsilevitch
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel r... David Holloway
- Re: Is traditional unixes kern... Wes Peters
- Re: Is traditional unixes kernel reall... Patryk Zadarnowski
- RE: Is traditional unixes kernel really stable ... Yevmenkin, Maksim N, CSCIO