Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!amdahl!oliveb!amiga!cbmvax!andy From: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: Unix V7 functionality under (or along with) AmigaDOS? (*LONG*) Message-ID: <6303@cbmvax.UUCP> Date: 16 Mar 89 15:51:38 GMT References: <6157@cbmvax.UUCP> <6185@cbmvax.UUCP> <6237@cbmvax.UUCP> <1292@dukeac.UUCP> <6278@cbmvax.UUCP> Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) Distribution: comp Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 64 In article shadow@pawl.rpi.edu (Deven Thomas Corzine) writes: >In article <6278@cbmvax.UUCP> jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes: > >>What about setting the CLI proc number to 0? Will some cli things choke on > >>this? Lattice's forkv() uses proc number 0. (What do workbench programs do?) > > > Not normally a good idea. It removes the ability to Break the > >program, or to have Status return anything reasonable. Isn't really too > >dangerous, though. > >Wouldn't Status simply ignore any process that has a CLI process >number of 0? (Strangely, sometimes Status will show a process number The standard Status command will ignore any process with a process number of 0. Of course, you realize that the CLI process number is an index to the task table. Other programs that play with the task table may not have the error check that status does. So it is a risk of memory corruption, depending on what other programs the end user has. >as being in the billions or so (many digits anyhow) after something >crashes... very incongrous.) That's what happens when memory is corrupted. You took a hit in your process structure. > > Talk to Bill Hawes. He wrote a PATH: that does similar sorts > >of things. Warning: packet-forwarding can get tricky. >I still gotta track down that PATH: device sometime. Yeah, I could >see packet-forwarding getting tricky... Any particular caveats you >have in mind? Though it may seem like a clean solution at first, you'll find that a packet forwarder won't ever be able to just put the sender in touch with the real receiver, but must stay in the loop, forwarding each packet. You might want to take a look at the path handler (with source) that came by comp.amiga.sources as well. >Be that as it may, it remains a fact that protection bits are easily >lost in distribution and simple copying. What are these 16 >user-defined bits? I assume the upper 16 bits, but I've never seen >mention of them... There are only 8 user-defined protection bits; as you surmised, the upper 8 bits are the user bits. The 1.3 Copy command preserves protection bits by default. The next version of ZOO will preserve all protection bits as well. Granted, magic numbers are never in danger of being lost, and may be a better solution thab protection bits. Hmmm, I wonder if romtags could be adapted...nah :-) andy -- andy finkel {uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy Commodore-Amiga, Inc. "The salesperson said this computer is the next best thing to sliced bread, but didn't say what to do about the crumbs in the disk drive." Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.