From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-22 07:17:21 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!tdsnet-transit!newspeer.tds.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Quality systems (Was: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the Ada
 mandate, and why it collapsed and died))
Date: 22 May 2003 09:17:16 -0500
Organization: Berbee Information Networks Corporation
Message-ID: <7Kes5mZVFDpT@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <9fa75d42.0304230424.10612b1a@posting.google.com>
 <b9gko2$pub@library1.airnews.net>
 <9fa75d42.0305091549.48b9c5d9@posting.google.com>
 <dstanbro-DDA263.20492210052003@mec2.bigpond.net.au>
 <ZpGva.13$1Q1.6@read3.inet.fi>
 <7507f79d.0305121629.5b8b7369@posting.google.com>
 <ln0wa.54$a03.44@read3.inet.fi>
 <9fa75d42.0305130643.526f61c2@posting.google.com>
 <nNmdnZ46ROWIwFyjXTWcqg@gbronline.com>
 <9fa75d42.0305140436.534f7151@posting.google.com>
 <ba067m$iph$1@south.jnrs.ja.net> <9fa75d42.0305160440.7846d1Organization: LJK
 Software
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1053612971 10966 192.135.80.34 (22 May 2003
 14:16:11 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 14:16:11 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37643
Date: 2003-05-22T09:17:16-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3ecca391$1@news.wineasy.se>, "Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@ake
h rkvaerner.com> writes:
> Marin David Condic wrote:
>> True, but with an OS this is achievable. It is possible to build an OS
> that
>> won't crash because of the particular application being run on it. (Or at
>> least crash so infrequently as to be practically the same thing).
> 
> I know of no operating system which does not crash because of application
> behaviour. Some does so more seldom than others, but they still do.

Seeming to indicate reproducible conditions that are relatively easy
for a trustworthy OS vendor to replicate in order to determine the defect
and eliminate it.

In article <3eccccc3$1@news.wineasy.se>, "Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@akerkvaerner.com> writes:
> 
> "Larry Kilgallen" wrote:
>> Seven versions later, that is now gone,
>> and most of the crashes I read about (but do not experience myself) are
>> exotic race conditions that might not be encountered with zero load,
>> but certainly are not a direct response to any particular application
>> activity.
> 
> Does it matter as long as the system crashes?

If you don't care about the system crashing, it does not matter.

Otherwise it is useful to know the relative ease with which the OS
vendor could have eliminated the problem.  Non-reproducible problems
may require entirely different software design techniques and dumping
previous code.  Many operating system vendors are unwilling to do that.

Reproducible problems typically require simple debugging and fixing up.
Operating system vendors who cannot accomplish that do not seem to me
worthy of trust.

Of course this all depends on the application.  My ReplayTV has an
OS race condition leading to occasional hangs.  I deal with it by
cooling the unit and not pressing buttons too quickly.