lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Mar]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: GGI Project Unhappy On Linux
On Mar 28, linker@nightshade.ml.org wrote:

> I'll make it real easy for those who say they dont need GGI because X
> hasn't crashed them.
>
>
> Start up X.
> Start up a xterm.
> kill -9 your xserver.
> Try to get control of your computer without the help of another computer.

Patient: If I do _this_, it hurts. What shall I do ?
Doctor: Well, if _this_ hurts, then don't do _this_ ...

I'm really getting more and more sick and disappointed about all this weired
and mostly wrong `technical' arguments in this `discussion'.

do you really think a kernel driver (if KGI or anything else) can or even should
protect the system from every possible abuse ? hey, why not talking about

cat /dev/zero > /dev/mem
or
cat /dev/zero > /dev/sda
??? [ childrun: don't try this at home !!! ;-]

do we really have no other problems to be solved in Linux or applications
highly demanded for Linux to be worked on?!?!


and Linux does provide help even for these weird cases/usages!
e.g. you can run X from /etc/inittab with `respawn' and you
immediately get a new server when crashed or maliciously killed.

and there is a kernel pathch floating around for many years now
which allows some hot key in raw console mode which can be used
to restore console, restart X, or whatever you like
(I don't have saved this patch as I never really needed it (as X developer
who is happily crashing systems!), so please don't ask for reference)


On Mar 27, Gerhard Mack wrote:

> Ram is fine, I've checked it, with 16 mb of ram I could
> easally crash the system by changing consoles several times.
> cards were:
>
> 1 ATI 16 bit forget what kind and I gave it away
> 2 S3 trio64v+
> 3 ATI mach64
>
> All had 1 mb ram
>
> the system is a Pentium 120
> Problems showed up with 16 mb ram
> the chipset is intel.

why do you think from your single system tested that is "normal behaviour" ?
and why did you never report the S3 lockup to XFree86 (I've grepped through ~70MB
gzipped stored mails from the last 4 years and couldn't find your name -- but
I only save mails I received which are relevant for me woring only on S3 support,
so I don't care about ATI too much). anyhow, I'm doing email support for
XFree86 S3 stuff now for a long time and I can tell you that your report is
_not_ a very common one at all (e.g.: my brother is running X right now
with 8MB on a DX6/66 with xemacs etc. so he's swapping for sure and this
system _never_ had any lockups even when switching/restarting X pretty often).

btw: there are quite a number of S3 Trio64V+ cards out there with 1MB ram
which are _pretty_ broken and cause severe system problems. how can you know
your card isn't broken ? or you CPU (yes I know reports where CPU is ok except
when e.g. running X, or ghopstscript in some cases, or ...) ?



Harald
--
All SCSI disks will from now on ___ _____
be required to send an email notice 0--,| /OOOOOOO\
24 hours prior to complete hardware failure! <_/ / /OOOOOOOOOOO\
\ \/OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO\
\ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|//
Harald Koenig, \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Inst.f.Theoret.Astrophysik // / \\ \
koenig@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de ^^^^^ ^^^^^
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site