[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <19990415225331.A4183@hexagon>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-listar-version: Listar v0.121a
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Errors-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-original-sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Precedence: bulk
X-list: linux-il
I would like to add that there is a greater difference between a blue
screen, a GPF,
and a kernel oops.
Let me elaborate:
On Windows 9x/NT:
When a Win32 application accesses memory out of its scope, you get a general
protection fault (
a grey dialog box with close/details).
On Windows 9x:
When a Win16 application fails (tries to access system area), you get a
modal white
dialog box with ignore/close options.
When a Win16 system module fails, you get a blue screen, with and exception
message,
if it only hangs, you get the system busy message.
On Windows NT:
When a system core module / driver fails or anything that will cause a STOP
event, you get
the compicated blue screen with the error message (what I call an apology
letter...).
Nimrod Zimerman wrote:
> No, that would be Windows FUD.
>
> Windows 95/NT is (on theory) just as 'protected' as Linux when running
> 32-bit applications. A 'your program performed an illegal action' Windows
> thingie is the equivalent of a Linux segmentation fault - it is
> recoverable, and doesn't influence other programs (Though, in Windows,
> this often leads to resources not being put back to the free resources
> pool, eventually leading to a system crash. No such problem with Linux,
> on most cases).
>
> A blue screen in Windows is the equivalent of a Linux kernel oops (or
> panic), which is sometimes recoverable and sometimes not, but generally
> leaves the system in an unstable state.
>
> Nimrod
