Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mailrus!ncar!ico!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Crash a RISC machine from user-mode code:
Keywords: Stress
Message-ID: <17442@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Date: 17 Aug 90 00:34:18 GMT
References: <1990Aug13.053147.11714@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu> <481@demott.COM> <1990Aug15.052856.28006@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu> <17425@haddock.ima.isc.com> <1990Aug16.051437.21661@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu>
Reply-To: karl@kelp.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Organization: Interactive Systems, Cambridge, MA 02138-5302
Lines: 17

In article <1990Aug16.051437.21661@laguna.ccsf.caltech.edu> bruce@seismo.gps.caltech.edu (Bruce Worden) writes:
>... such a crash does not constitute `failure' unless it significantly
>detracts from the machine's utility.

That's one usable definition.  Others will disagree, perhaps because they are
more afraid of malicious users than you are.

Anyway, I think this is the key, and if the parties will agree to disagree, we
can truncate this before it becomes a flame war.


>Frankly Karl, I'm suprised that you did not kill this subject long ago.

I don't use kill files.  I actually look at every article, at least briefly,
in this newsgroup and a few others.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (karl@kelp.ima.isc.com or ima!kelp!karl), The Walking Lint