Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:03:15PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Olivier Galibert wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>>> It's a kernel bug, and it needs to be fixed. >>> I'm not convinced. It's been that way for 15 years, it's that way in >>> the BSD kernels, at that point it's a feature. The bug is in the >>> documentation, nowhere else. And in gcc for blindly trusting the >>> documentation. >> No, the bug *in the kernel* was already present (if you had a signal >> raised during a call to memmove). It's just more visible with GCC 4.3. > > I'm curious, since when paper documentation became the Truth and > reality became a bug?
Isn't that the definition of a bug? That a program does not meet its specification? Andrew.
