> %Could you please try the patch below? It is like the patch that Paul
> %sent, except it should handle error conditions better.
> %
> %This patch is against -current, but I think it will apply cleanly to
> %-stable too.
>
> My pleasure. This patch applies cleanly against a two day old
> -stab
%In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
%Russell L. Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
%>
%> Bingo!
%>
%> Thanks guys!
%
%Not so fast there, fella. You're not getting off that easily. ;-)
%Could you please try the patch below? It is like the patch that Paul
%sent, except it should handle error conditi
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Russell L. Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bingo!
>
> Thanks guys!
Not so fast there, fella. You're not getting off that easily. ;-)
Could you please try the patch below? It is like the patch that Paul
sent, except it should handle error conditions better
Bingo!
Thanks guys!
Russell
%John Polstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
%> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
%> Russell L. Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
%> >
%> > On a fairly recent -STABLE I am getting this failure:
%> >
%> > ld-elf.so.1: assert failed: /usr/src/libexec/rtld-elf/rtld.c:2033
John Polstra ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Russell L. Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On a fairly recent -STABLE I am getting this failure:
> >
> > ld-elf.so.1: assert failed: /usr/src/libexec/rtld-elf/rtld.c:2033
> >
> > I assume I'm doing something s
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Russell L. Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On a fairly recent -STABLE I am getting this failure:
>
> ld-elf.so.1: assert failed: /usr/src/libexec/rtld-elf/rtld.c:2033
>
> I assume I'm doing something stupid, however the same code
> works on Linux gcc-2.95.2
6 matches
Mail list logo