In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > 22:43:39 <@jmb> http://source.netsurf-browser.org/?view=rev&revision=4068 > 22:44:02 <@jmb> and, the reason that got reverted is because > unixlib/sigstate.h defines __write_backtrace, which we > depend on > 22:44:22 <@jmb> can we *please* get unixlib sorted in that area > 22:44:37 <@jmb> or do we get to reinvent the backtracing wheel > > In addition to this, if we assume that NS 2.0 must build correctly with > -Werror enabled, the above change blocks any 2.0 release as it introduces > a build warning. > > I would rather not have to reinvent backtrace emission in NS itself. > It's beyond me quite why write_backtrace isn't public UnixLib API > already as it's hugely useful, especially given the dearth of decent > debug tools on RO.
Sorry, this is a misunderstanding. If there is a desire to make some useful internal UnixLib routines or variables exposed, then lets have a communication on that and go forward. I simply didn't know a similar change got reverted and thought to be helpful to make NS and its new libraries GCCSDK 4 build compatible again. :-( BTW, __dynamic_num is no longer defined in UnixLib 5 and this is recently in use by NS. Is there a real need to have UnixLib's DA area saved or rather just 'could be useful' value ? John. -- John Tytgat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
