Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 13:07:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Wesley Morgan <morganw@chemikals.org> Cc: iedowse@maths.tcd.ie, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: KSE status report Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0207021306540.97650-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <13302.148.175.49.1.1025639460.squirrel@www.chemikals.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
ok, so you are saying that GNOME stuff works fine? What do yuo have running and is there still anything that does the wrong thing? On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Wesley Morgan wrote: > After reading this... I got to thinking, and I copied the old headers into > the wrong place. After rebuilding, it works fine :)... That's what I get > for doing it at 2am! My fault, you guys could have fixed this almost > immediately except for some bad info from me. > > Good idea. > > > > Unforunatly someone tried to complie a libc_r with the old queue.h and > > it had the same problem (or so they said). > > > > On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Ian Dowse wrote: > > > >> In message > >> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0207020054590.94626-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>, Ju > >> lian Elischer writes: > >> >The big problem at the moment is that something in the > >> >source tree as a whole, and probably something that came in with KSE > >> >is stopping us from successfully compiling a working libc_r. > >> >(a bit ironic really). > >> > >> Is the new > >> > >> (elm)->field.tqe_next = (void *)-1; > >> > >> in TAILQ_REMOVE a likely candidate? That could easily tickle old bugs > >> in other code. The libc_r code does use a lot of TAILQ macros. > >> > >> Ian > >> > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0207021306540.97650-100000>