On 7/3/07, Austin Hook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Chris,
Thanks!
What kind of an issue was it? You just had to increase the
VM_PHYSSEG_MAX definition, or was that a misdirection?
Just had to increase VM_PHYSSEG_MAX.
BTW, way, how long does it take for such patches to show up in either
the 4.1 or patch branch corrections lists on the web site?
That's a manual process to put patches and errata up. It wasn't clear
that we needed to actually issue a separate patch for this, since we
haven't heard of very many machines being affected by this... only two
reported machines so far that need more than 5 segments.
CK
--
GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too?
