From owner-freebsd-ports Mon May 15 4:45:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at [128.130.111.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE96D37B5A6 for ; Mon, 15 May 2000 04:45:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at) Received: from [128.130.111.10] (nunki [128.130.111.10]) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA20837; Mon, 15 May 2000 13:41:39 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 13:41:38 +0200 (MET DST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Mikhail Teterin Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/emulators/wine/patches/patch-da Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Dear Mikhail, I am currently trying to update the Wine port in FreeBSD's port collection and I've got a question concerning the patch from you that I mentioned in the subject. A similiar change has been made to the Wine master sources (which means that your patch won't apply any longer), but in the "official" patch we have if (((*data = ptrace( PTRACE_PEEKDATA, thread->unix_pid, addr, 0 )) ... while your patch has if (((*data = ptrace( PTRACE_PEEKDATA, thread->unix_pid, addr, *data )) ... What do you think about this? Which of these versions is the one we should take (and possibly submit to the Wine folks)? Gerald -- Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message