That's a good point. Should I revert to something similar like before,
or do you have a better idea?
Thanks,
christos
> On May 5, 2019, at 9:09 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
>
>Date:Sun, 5 May 2019 16:38:04 -0400
>From:Christos Zoulas
>Message-ID: <41fb59a5-c9e0-4392-bd5c
On 04/05/2019 06:04, Tetsuya Isaki wrote:
> amiga/GENERIC is generated from GENERIC.in .
I realised after, now trying to ditch the m4 with the intent that there
is a GENERIC.common that is built upon by the different configs.
> What is the difference in m68k family?
> Enabled: amiga, cesfic, hp3
On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 03:01:31AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> We forbid NULL pointer dereference on modern ports. It was certainly
> used by PDP-11 as there was a special zeroed mask in 0x0 and
> dereferencing NULL pointer was returning zero.
No, we forbid NULL pointer dereferences on shared
On 06.05.2019 22:59, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 03:01:31AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> We forbid NULL pointer dereference on modern ports. It was certainly
>> used by PDP-11 as there was a special zeroed mask in 0x0 and
>> dereferencing NULL pointer was returning zero
> I see. I will document in the man page that (void *)0 and (void *)1 are
> special cases and they have to be set with PTRACE_REG_SET_PC()
> explicitly if really intended.
>
> Keeping allowed 0x0 in PT_CONTINUE/PT_DETACH/.. makes it harder to
> distinguish between broken kernel and broken program.
On 07.05.2019 02:49, matthew green wrote:
>> I see. I will document in the man page that (void *)0 and (void *)1 are
>> special cases and they have to be set with PTRACE_REG_SET_PC()
>> explicitly if really intended.
>>
>> Keeping allowed 0x0 in PT_CONTINUE/PT_DETACH/.. makes it harder to
>> distin
Just a thought
Currently we have the global sysctl variable, but I wonder if it should
be made local to a particular emulation and/or to an individual process?
On Tue, 7 May 2019, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
On 07.05.2019 02:49, matthew green wrote:
I see. I will document in the man page th
On 07.05.2019 03:22, Paul Goyette wrote:
> Just a thought
>
> Currently we have the global sysctl variable, but I wonder if it should
> be made local to a particular emulation and/or to an individual process?
>
I think it would be too much.
We already warn a user with ttyprintf(9) once it's
