Subject: Re: Non executable mappings and compatibility options bugs
To: Chuck Silvers <email@example.com>
From: Emmanuel Dreyfus <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/21/2004 00:24:26
Chuck Silvers <email@example.com> wrote:
> > But this problem also exist if we have a per-emulation flag, right?
> right, that comment is unrelated to the per-process vs. per-emulation one.
Well, that means that the right fix will cause a lot of MD changes (just
as you did when committing non executable mappings), so I wonder if this
can be done for 2.0 now. On the other hand, if we don't do anything, we
will have a lot of regression in binary compatibility options...
Il y a 10 sortes de personnes dans le monde: ceux qui comprennent
le binaire et ceux qui ne le comprennent pas.