Re: Processed: reassign 179781 to glibc, severity of 179781 is serious, merging 179781 178645

2003-02-17 Thread GOTO Masanori
At Mon, 17 Feb 2003 11:12:11 -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 10:58:21PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > Hi Guido, > > Thanks for your explanation. > > > > At Sun, 16 Feb 2003 23:32:42 +0100, > > Guido Guenther wrote: > > > I'm trying to explain how I understand these issu

Re: Processed: reassign 179781 to glibc, severity of 179781 is serious, merging 179781 178645

2003-02-17 Thread GOTO Masanori
Hi Guido! At Mon, 17 Feb 2003 15:27:05 +0100, Guido Guenther wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 10:58:21PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > [..snip..] > > > /usr/bin/nm __udivdi3 > > > /usr/bin/nm __umoddi3 > > > /usr/bin/strip __ucmpdi2 > > > /usr/bin/strip __udivdi3 > > > > I'm sorry, but I can

Re: Processed: reassign 179781 to glibc, severity of 179781 is serious, merging 179781 178645

2003-02-17 Thread Daniel Jacobowitz
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 10:58:21PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > Hi Guido, > Thanks for your explanation. > > At Sun, 16 Feb 2003 23:32:42 +0100, > Guido Guenther wrote: > > I'm trying to explain how I understand these issues, but it might not be > > correct: > > > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:49

Re: Processed: reassign 179781 to glibc, severity of 179781 is serious, merging 179781 178645

2003-02-17 Thread Guido Guenther
On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 10:58:21PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: [..snip..] > > /usr/bin/nm __udivdi3 > > /usr/bin/nm __umoddi3 > > /usr/bin/strip __ucmpdi2 > > /usr/bin/strip __udivdi3 > > I'm sorry, but I can't understand what you mean... You mean that a binary > has _udivdi3 or __umoddi3 a

Re: Processed: reassign 179781 to glibc, severity of 179781 is serious, merging 179781 178645

2003-02-17 Thread GOTO Masanori
Hi Guido, Thanks for your explanation. At Sun, 16 Feb 2003 23:32:42 +0100, Guido Guenther wrote: > I'm trying to explain how I understand these issues, but it might not be > correct: > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 12:49:44AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote: > > 1. Why is __fixunsdfdi appeared, on the co