On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:32:02PM -0700, Matt Thomas wrote:
>At 08:20 PM 9/23/2003, Andrew Brown wrote:
>>On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 07:04:21PM -0700, Chuck Silvers wrote:
>> >On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 10:59:12AM +0900, enami tsugutomo wrote:
>> >> Chuck Silvers <chuq@chuq.com> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > so I'm thinking that the stack problem might really be a bug in the
>> >> > amap merging code.
>> >>
>> >> Which stack problem are you referring to?
>> >
>> >I don't know...
>> >andrew's previous mail referred opaquely to a problem with stack mappings,
>> >and I asked him what that was about.
>>
>>something getting merged with the stack and i didn't like it.  i think
>>that's the problem, though i'm not sure now.  i am confusing even
>>myself.  sigh.
>
>Maybe the solution is to put a no-access page at the bottom of the stack
>to prevent merges.

that seems a bit of a cop-out, and would further complicate the
placement of the dynamic linker on exec.  :-/

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
werdna@squooshy.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."