At 11:12 AM 3/29/2002 -0800, Steve Fink wrote: >On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 03:25:19AM -0500, Michel J Lambert wrote: > > The attached patch fixes a bunch of bugs. They are: >It looks good to me, with one caveat. 'immortal' sounds wrong to me, >since that has another (useful) meaning -- the Java VM, for example, >has an separate area for immortal data. It's used for stuff like the >metadata for loaded classes. I would suggest 'immune'. Opinions?
Thanks, Mike. The consensus is this patch fixes quite a few things. Applied with a couple of modifications, see my previous email. You might want to check behind me. Tests run good and programs that crashed before now run happily with no corruption. Also noted that we might want to rename from 'immortal' to something else. -Melvin
