[lkml]   [1996]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: make
On Sat, 15 Jun 1996, James M. Cassidy wrote:

> Well for your information I did read the release notes. I did recompile
> make and I STILL have the problem with the new excutable. Not too mention
> the little probablem their talking about should cause any problems with the
> old executables. When it comes to executing binaries your computer doesn't
> care what you use for variables name it removes them anyways in compilation
> unelss you tell it to include them for debugging.

Isn't it a nice make patch at the end of the release-note?
And variables names are removed but not there relative location in a
struct and if you think you're useing the right field (since two shared
the same value) of a struct , but you managed to use the wrong one , if
it's corected in a later edition of the shared-lib you get another file
length (ie. to big/small filename) you get the strange result that you
had in make.
It's all rather basic programming knowledge IMHO (at least in this
maillist :)

| We the willing , leaded by thre ignorant , makeing the impossible |
| for the unthankfull. We have done so much under such a long time with |
| so small resoucres ,that we now have qualified ourself to do anything |
| with help of nothing |
| Daniel "Que" Lehnberg , , |

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.040 / U:5.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site