From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Aug 30 16:06:29 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6634B16A4C0
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 30 Aug 2003 16:06:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web13406.mail.yahoo.com (web13406.mail.yahoo.com
	[216.136.175.64])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D931943FB1
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 30 Aug 2003 16:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from giffunip@yahoo.com)
Message-ID: <20030830230628.98508.qmail@web13406.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [200.91.194.218] by web13406.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Sun, 31 Aug 2003 00:06:28 BST
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 00:06:28 +0100 (BST)
From: "=?iso-8859-1?q?Pedro=20F.=20Giffuni?=" <giffunip@yahoo.com>
To: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <20030830221458.GC85746@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
cc: kientzle@acm.org
Subject: Re: Non-executable mappings now in NetBSD too
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 23:06:29 -0000

(FWIW, Theo claims his changes are only enforcing POSIX.)

 --- Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au> wrote: 

...
> 
> Does OpenBSD support any JIT JVM?
> 

Hmmm... no, looks like they run our (or the linux) JVM under emulation.

> > If perl didn't break, I think Java will survive too.
> 
> Emacs and perl both use traditional bytecode interpreters, as does the
> Classic JVM.  I agree they will be unaffected.  This change will only
> impact JIT JVMs.
> 

Well, we only have a JIT JVM for the i386, and on the particular case of the
i386 we cannot enforce full protection anyways so there is probably a
workaround if we do need it. 

cheers,

    Pedro.

________________________________________________________________________
Want to chat instantly with your online friends?  Get the FREE Yahoo!
Messenger http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/