Re: proxy memory objects

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 07:02:59PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Marcus Brinkmann <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > However, I think I will change the function name of the hack to
> > mach_create_memory_object_proxy, to illustrate the target of the RPC better
> > and leave the memory_object_* name space to the memory object (and control)
> > interface.
> 
> Yes, I think this is the right strategy.  So we need two additional
> interfaces, one called mach_create_memory_object_proxy, and one called
> memory_object_create_proxy.

Yes, but as I said, we don't need the latter one right away to fix the
security hole.  It can be added at any later time just as well.

Thanks,
Marcus

-- 
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU      http://www.gnu.org    [email protected]
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
[email protected]
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/