merlin@hqda-ai.UUCP (02/07/87)
In article <299@netxcom.UUCP>, beattie@netxcom.UUCP (Brian Beattie) writes: [ 43 lines of included material deleted ] > Actually if you arange your code so data follows (which MINIX does) > since all jumps/calls/rets (except the long vesion) are CS:OFFSET > you may jump into your data, but not outside of your process space. [ 6 lines of signature deleted ] Brian's article showed on my system as 52 lines. 3 lines were his comments to 43 lines of material from previous articles. Brian made a valid point, but I had to scan (and pay to transmit) two screenfuls of STUFF I'VE ALREADY READ just to get to his information. I cite Brian's article here as a convenient example, but I've seen a lot of this, and I don't want anyone to think I'm picking on Brian in particular. If you post a followup, you SHOULD edit out everything that you're not making specific comment about. You don't even have to include the original article at all! The news software puts a References line in the header. In case you reader didn't see the original, its still possible to go back and find it later. Please, folks, lets clean up our postings. -- David S. Hayes, The Merlin of Avalon PhoneNet: (202) 694-6900 ARPA: merlin%hqda-ai.uucp@smoke.brl.mil UUCP: ...!seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin