POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Apparently... Server Time
14 Oct 2026 18:41:18 EDT (-0400)
  Apparently... (Message 1 to 21 of 21)  
From: Tim Cook
Subject: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 00:16:20
Message: <48097214$1@news.povray.org>
...PnP device drivers are programmed into the device themselves, not 
bundled as generic packages with windows
...one can decompile windows and see the original comments from the code
...75% of the space windows occupies is junk comments that can be 
removed after aforementioned decompile
...a unix kernel has no form of security whatsoever; any security, 
including non-superuser accounts, must be programmed by the admin 
separately or dropped in as modules that the admin configures, and 
contain 'back doors' that those in the know can readily access
...2 semesters of C and Pascal programming at university is sufficient 
to establish certain knowledge that any system security that the OS 
itself handles is bad, third-party software is definitely the way to go

*flabbergasted after dinner conversation with housemate*

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 03:51:55
Message: <4809a49b@news.povray.org>
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> ...PnP device drivers are programmed into the device themselves, not 
> bundled as generic packages with windows
> ...one can decompile windows and see the original comments from the code
> ...75% of the space windows occupies is junk comments that can be 
> removed after aforementioned decompile
> ...a unix kernel has no form of security whatsoever; any security, 
> including non-superuser accounts, must be programmed by the admin 
> separately or dropped in as modules that the admin configures, and 
> contain 'back doors' that those in the know can readily access
> ...2 semesters of C and Pascal programming at university is sufficient 
> to establish certain knowledge that any system security that the OS 
> itself handles is bad, third-party software is definitely the way to go

> *flabbergasted after dinner conversation with housemate*

  The sad thing is that bosses usually eagerly hire that kind of people
because they like what they are saying.

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid XP v8
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 05:35:19
Message: <4809bcd7$1@news.povray.org>
Warp wrote:

>   The sad thing is that bosses usually eagerly hire that kind of people
> because they like what they are saying.

quod enim mavult homo verum esse, id potius credit.

Sad but true...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*


Post a reply to this message

From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 11:27:14
Message: <480a0f52$1@news.povray.org>
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:16:19 -0400, Tim Cook wrote:

> *flabbergasted after dinner conversation with housemate*

Egads, you know my B-I-L Neil?  He once made the assertion that if you 
load a document created with a newer version of Word for Mac (but *only* 
for Mac) into an older version of Word for Mac, the *document* will 
upgrade your older version of Word to the newer version so you can read/
edit the document.

That conversation (held over Thanksgiving dinner about 9 years ago) 
caused me to go into the pantry and start hitting my head against the 
wall.

Jim


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 11:48:27
Message: <480a144b@news.povray.org>
Tim Cook wrote:
> ....PnP device drivers are programmed into the device themselves, not 
> bundled as generic packages with windows

This is actually true for some types of USB devices. I.e., USB has a 
mechanism whereby it can provide the driver to the machine when you plug 
it in. (I think the driver gets presented as files on a "removable disk" 
interface, which the OS is supposed to recognise and install and restart 
the USB device afterwards.)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid XP v8
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 11:51:27
Message: <480a14ff@news.povray.org>
Darren New wrote:

> This is actually true for some types of USB devices. I.e., USB has a 
> mechanism whereby it can provide the driver to the machine when you plug 
> it in. (I think the driver gets presented as files on a "removable disk" 
> interface, which the OS is supposed to recognise and install and restart 
> the USB device afterwards.)

Interesting. And how do you account for the fact that the USB device 
could be connected to any possible computer architecture, running any 
possible OS?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*


Post a reply to this message

From: Tim Cook
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 11:53:32
Message: <480a157c$1@news.povray.org>
Darren New wrote:
> Tim Cook wrote:
>> ....PnP device drivers are programmed into the device themselves, not 
>> bundled as generic packages with windows
> 
> This is actually true for some types of USB devices. I.e., USB has a 
> mechanism whereby it can provide the driver to the machine when you plug 
> it in. (I think the driver gets presented as files on a "removable disk" 
> interface, which the OS is supposed to recognise and install and restart 
> the USB device afterwards.)

yeah the wireless keyboard/mouse that came with this machine had a USB 
stick that was the drivers/RF receiver.  pretty slick.  but I think 
housemate was saying in general.  that those .cab files windows hoards 
aren't full of drivers for 50,000 flavours of hardware.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.digitalartsuk.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------


Post a reply to this message

From: Eero Ahonen
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 12:40:35
Message: <480a2083$1@news.povray.org>
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 
> Interesting. And how do you account for the fact that the USB device 
> could be connected to any possible computer architecture, running any 
> possible OS?
> 

Usually they just assume You're running Windows on x86.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
    http://www.zbxt.net
       aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 12:59:52
Message: <480a2508$1@news.povray.org>
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Interesting. And how do you account for the fact that the USB device 
> could be connected to any possible computer architecture, running any 
> possible OS?

The same way you account for a CD that can boot on multiple 
architectures. I imagine if the driver for your OS isn't on the "usb 
disk drive", then you need to get it somewhere else.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 13:01:02
Message: <480a254e$1@news.povray.org>
Tim Cook wrote:
> housemate was saying in general.  

Yah. I'm just saying that it's not completely insane, but just possibly 
someone who is ignorant of the details trying to understand something 
that requires knowing the details to get right. :-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid XP v8
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 16:04:03
Message: <480a5033@news.povray.org>
>> Interesting. And how do you account for the fact that the USB device 
>> could be connected to any possible computer architecture, running any 
>> possible OS?
> 
> The same way you account for a CD that can boot on multiple 
> architectures.

Really? I wasn't aware that it's possible to do that either...

> I imagine if the driver for your OS isn't on the "usb 
> disk drive", then you need to get it somewhere else.

Fair enough...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*


Post a reply to this message

From: Gail Shaw
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 16:38:44
Message: <480a5854@news.povray.org>
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:480a144b@news.povray.org...
> Tim Cook wrote:
> > ....PnP device drivers are programmed into the device themselves, not
> > bundled as generic packages with windows
>
> This is actually true for some types of USB devices.

My laptop 3G modem does this too. Windows initially sees it as a CDRom, with
the installation program on it.


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 18:18:17
Message: <480a6fa9@news.povray.org>
Gail Shaw wrote:
> My laptop 3G modem does this too. Windows initially sees it as a CDRom, with
> the installation program on it.

Then there's the old Atari 800 modem, which looked for ten consecutive 
failed requests to read the boot sector off the floppy drive and on the 
eleventh try said "Oh! Me! Here I am!" and proceeded to install the 
drivers. :-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."


Post a reply to this message

From: Halbert
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 19 Apr 2008 22:16:53
Message: <480aa795@news.povray.org>
I've had occasion to look at MS Windows binaries and I have never seen 
anything resembling a comment from the source. When I think about it, I 
wonder how one would intentionaly preserve their comments in a compiled 
binary. Their may be a way, but I don't know about it. I would guess it 
would have to be a compiler switch I've never used.
On the other hand, I have seen source code from MS Windows in it's original 
form before and seen some very bad programming habits. (Such as the use of 
goto in source written in C)
--
H²


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 20 Apr 2008 12:21:45
Message: <480b6d99$1@news.povray.org>
Halbert wrote:
> When I think about it, I 
> wonder how one would intentionaly preserve their comments in a compiled 
> binary. 

I'm wondering if whoever invented this idea might have been thinking of 
things like in the .NET compiled objects where it might be storing 
java-doc-like descriptions of the interface routines in the binaries. 
Technically, comments from the source, but not really what a programmer 
would think of as "comments from the source."  That, module attributes 
(for run-time reflection, whatever they're called in .NET), debugging 
symbols, etc?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."


Post a reply to this message

From: Chambers
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 20 Apr 2008 15:00:21
Message: <480b92c5$1@news.povray.org>
Darren New wrote:
> Halbert wrote:
>> When I think about it, I wonder how one would intentionaly preserve 
>> their comments in a compiled binary. 
> 
> I'm wondering if whoever invented this idea might have been thinking of 
> things like in the .NET compiled objects where it might be storing 
> java-doc-like descriptions of the interface routines in the binaries. 
> Technically, comments from the source, but not really what a programmer 
> would think of as "comments from the source."  That, module attributes 
> (for run-time reflection, whatever they're called in .NET), debugging 
> symbols, etc?
> 

More than likely debugging symbols, and they just didn't understand what 
those are.

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com


Post a reply to this message

From: Gail Shaw
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 20 Apr 2008 16:32:16
Message: <480ba850@news.povray.org>
"Chambers" <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote in message
news:480b92c5$1@news.povray.org...
>
> More than likely debugging symbols, and they just didn't understand what
> those are.

Except, AFAIK, the symbols aren't included in any MS program. If you want
the debugging symbols, you have to download them seperatly.


Post a reply to this message

From: Nicolas Alvarez
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 20 Apr 2008 16:38:30
Message: <480ba9c6@news.povray.org>
Gail Shaw escribió:
> "Chambers" <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote
>> More than likely debugging symbols, and they just didn't understand what
>> those are.
> 
> Except, AFAIK, the symbols aren't included in any MS program. If you want
> the debugging symbols, you have to download them seperatly.

Windows never defined a way to include debugging symbols inside the 
executable. It's always in separate .pdb files.

If you compile Windows programs with gcc, with debugging symbols 
enabled, they end up inside the .exe like on Linux, and gdb works on 
them; but it's incompatible with MSVC debugger. And viceversa; gdb 
doesn't understand .pdb symbol files.


Post a reply to this message

From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 20 Apr 2008 17:50:27
Message: <480bbaa3$1@news.povray.org>
Gail Shaw wrote:
> Except, AFAIK, the symbols aren't included in any MS program. If you want
> the debugging symbols, you have to download them seperatly.

Except they're technically not "debugging symbols" in DLLs and .NET 
stuff, since you dynamically link them. They're entry points for the 
linking loader, not for the debugger.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."


Post a reply to this message

From: Phil Cook
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 21 Apr 2008 11:12:25
Message: <op.t9yu7obqc3xi7v@news.povray.org>
And lo on Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:53:31 +0100, Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom>  
did spake, saying:

> those .cab files windows hoards aren't full of drivers for 50,000  
> flavours of hardware.

Should have told him that cabs always come with drivers and that's how  
Windows moves its files around using the GetTaxi call.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com


Post a reply to this message

From: Doctor John
Subject: Re: Apparently...
Date: 21 Apr 2008 14:46:57
Message: <480ce121$1@news.povray.org>
Phil Cook wrote:
>> flavours of hardware.
> 
> Should have told him that cabs always come with drivers and that's how
> Windows moves its files around using the GetTaxi call.
> 
Excellent! :-)

John

-- 
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.