Re: secure exec

[Marcus Brinkmann]

On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 11:18:06AM +0200, Niels Möller wrote:
> I think it might be a significant optimization to use one bit of the
> reply label for an error indication.

Have you checked what can be expressed with the IDL4 compiler?
And have you considered the limited number of msg ids in the system?

Maybe we won't use the msg label in the reply as a msg id.  Maybe we use it
for something else or we don't use it at all.

Maybe you can just take the untyped count and compare it with what you
expect.  If the command fails, you don't need to pass all the out
parameters, so that alone could give an indication if there was an error or
not.  But I don't know.  I have not yet studied the IDL4 documentation, and
I have not yet really thought through what the best approach will be.

(Also consider things like sending messages over a network, for example).

Thanks,
Marcus

-- 
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU      http://www.gnu.org    address@hidden
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
address@hidden
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/