On Sun, 25 Nov 2012, Iain Hibbert wrote:
Log Message:
Teach gcc4.1's cpp about the magic __COUNTER__ macro,
which returns a unique integer each time it is expanded.
This code was written without reference to any other
implementation of the same feature.
out of interest, what code uses this?
_
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Alan Barrett wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: apb
> Date: Sat Nov 24 09:07:44 UTC 2012
>
> Modified Files:
> src/gnu/dist/gcc4/libcpp: init.c macro.c
> src/gnu/dist/gcc4/libcpp/include: cpplib.h
>
> Log Message:
> Teach gcc4.1's cpp about the magi
On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 08:26:50PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: christos
> Date: Sun Jun 10 00:26:50 UTC 2012
>
> Modified Files:
> src/gnu/dist/groff/tmac: doc-syms
>
> Log Message:
> add libexecinfo
Thank you, but not here please. It should be
On Fri, 15 Jul 2011, matthew green wrote:
Log Message:
Sprinkle some "NetBSD_DISABLED_" prefixes in file names in Makefile
targets, to ensure that the associated commands do not run. This should
prevent source files from being overwritten at build time by autoconf
and friends. Fixes PR 45132.
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: apb
> Date: Thu Jul 14 17:29:43 UTC 2011
>
> Modified Files:
> src/gnu/dist/autoconf: Makefile.in
> src/gnu/dist/gettext/gettext-runtime: Makefile.in
> src/gnu/dist/gettext/gettext-runtime/libasprintf: Makefile.in
> src/gnu/dist/
On Sat, 7 May 2011, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> Add a no_stack_protector function attribute to localize the effect
> of disabling stack protection on a function-by-function level, as
> opposed to per source file.
how should we enable use of this, is the patch below ok or should it have
additional re
In article <20110511232046.eec3d17...@cvs.netbsd.org>,
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Module Name: src
>Committed By: joerg
>Date: Wed May 11 23:20:46 UTC 2011
>
>Modified Files:
> src/gnu/dist/texinfo/makeinfo: sectioning.c
>
>Log Message:
>Fix two rather obviousbuffe
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: matt
> Date: Fri Feb 25 22:36:10 UTC 2011
>
> Modified Files:
> src/gnu/dist/gcc4/gcc/config/rs6000: netbsd.h
>
> Log Message:
> Explicitly make sure TARGET_SECURE_PLT is defined correctly rather than
> relying on HAVE_AS_REL16 from "auto-host.h"
Module Name:src
Committed By: joerg
Date: Sat Feb 27 21:15:54 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/gnu/dist/groff/tmac: doc.tmac
Log Message:
Resolve disagreement between comment and code in favour of the comment,
so that more than one .%U can be used. Found by Jukka Ruohonen.
T
Module Name:src
Committed By: joerg
Date: Sat Feb 27 21:15:54 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/gnu/dist/groff/tmac: doc.tmac
Log Message:
Resolve disagreement between comment and code in favour of the comment,
so that more than one .%U can be used. Found by Jukka Ruohonen.
T
Module Name:src
Committed By: dsl
Date: Mon Feb 22 08:19:38 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/gnu/dist/gdb6/gdb: amd64nbsd-tdep.c
Log Message:
Fix check for old trap frame layout.
To generate a diff of this commit:
cvs rdiff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 src/gnu/dist/gdb6/gdb/amd64nbsd-tdep
Module Name:src
Committed By: dsl
Date: Mon Feb 22 08:19:38 UTC 2010
Modified Files:
src/gnu/dist/gdb6/gdb: amd64nbsd-tdep.c
Log Message:
Fix check for old trap frame layout.
To generate a diff of this commit:
cvs rdiff -u -r1.4 -r1.5 src/gnu/dist/gdb6/gdb/amd64nbsd-tdep
> The above is defining a global symbol that referes to the middle of
> a struct, not setting a memory location to the address of the it.
Do you mean lwp0.l_addr may vary during execution?
enami.
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 08:29:43AM +0900, enami tsugutomo wrote:
> > > i wonder if we can re-add proc0paddr, defined to be = lwp0.l_addr
> > > at some point in main, to help this work with older gdb?
> > >
> > > this seems like a worth-while change since it's part of bsd-kvm.c.
> >
> > would need
> > i wonder if we can re-add proc0paddr, defined to be = lwp0.l_addr
> > at some point in main, to help this work with older gdb?
> >
> > this seems like a worth-while change since it's part of bsd-kvm.c.
>
> would need to be in md code since L_ADDR needs to come from assym.h.
>
> .glob
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:45:18AM -0800, Matt Thomas wrote:
>
> > i wonder if we can re-add proc0paddr, defined to be = lwp0.l_addr
> > at some point in main, to help this work with older gdb?
> >
> > this seems like a worth-while change since it's part of bsd-kvm.c.
>
> would need to be in md
On Nov 26, 2009, at 11:47 PM, matthew green wrote:
>
> Module Name:src
> Committed By: enami
> Date: Fri Nov 27 02:51:15 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/gnu/dist/gdb6/gdb: bsd-kvm.c
>
> Log Message:
> Lookup lwp0.l_addr instead of proc0paddr to
Module Name: src
Committed By:enami
Date:Fri Nov 27 02:51:15 UTC 2009
Modified Files:
src/gnu/dist/gdb6/gdb: bsd-kvm.c
Log Message:
Lookup lwp0.l_addr instead of proc0paddr to locate PCB.
hmmm..
i wonder if we can re-add proc0paddr, defin
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: enami
> Date: Fri Nov 27 02:51:15 UTC 2009
>
> Modified Files:
> src/gnu/dist/gdb6/gdb: bsd-kvm.c
>
> Log Message:
> Lookup lwp0.l_addr instead of proc0paddr to locate PCB.
I wonder if it is better to keep proc0paddr in kernel as a pointer to
PCB
19 matches
Mail list logo
