Answering to myself.
Samuel Thibault, le Thu 14 Jun 2007 16:57:29 +0200, a écrit :
> Thomas Schwinge, le Thu 14 Jun 2007 16:42:10 +0200, a écrit :
> > From the quick glance I had, the problem is that MIG only handles data
> > structures via the `vm_address_t' type, whereas in the C code those
> >
Hi,
Thomas Schwinge, le Thu 14 Jun 2007 16:42:10 +0200, a écrit :
> From the quick glance I had, the problem is that MIG only handles data
> structures via the `vm_address_t' type, whereas in the C code those
> are pointers to structures.
But if I understand correctly, the problem is that doing t
Hello!
For the following list of warnings (which were also already included in
my previous email's list) I think (I didn't really check so far ;-) that
the following patch might eliminate a chunk of those. Alternatively we
would have to apply some `union'ing magic in a lot of places. From the
qu
