On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 12:29:18AM -0700, Damien Neil wrote:
> CVS changes over the past couple of days mean this patch will no
> longer cleanly apply. I'd be happy to update it to patch cleanly
> against the current CVS code, but I'd like to know first if the
> approach it takes is on the right track.
I like it, if only because reduction of common code is always good,
and reduction of common code while everything's in a lot of flux
is even better.
> Whether this patch makes it in or not, it would be nice if either
> the "end" opcode was renamed, or if something was added to munge
> the opcode function names--the CVS parrot still cores on FreeBSD
> due to a symbol conflict with libc.
Urgh, urgh, urgh. I don't *like* the idea of munging opcode function
names, but I equally don't like coredumps. Isn't there a way of
telling the linker to use our own symbols?
Simon
