[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?

YES I APPLIED the patch. Hell it won't compile without it. If I
compiled it that means I applied the patch :P

> 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 :)

'namelen' and 'reclen' are the same size variable are not? They are
both located in the same location in the structure are they not? Then they
both should point to the same information when compiled. If the size has
changed or the location in the structure then I can see it causing probablems
with shared libraries. But the size hasn't changed has or the location has

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.038 / U:0.644 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site