On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 07:48:55AM +0530, Kaiwan N Billimoria wrote:
> The script attempts to detect the architecture it's running upon; as of now,
> we explicitly support x86_64, PPC64 and x86_32.
> If it's one of them, we proceed "normally". If we fail to detect the arch,
> we fallback to 64-bit
The script attempts to detect the architecture it's running upon; as of now,
we explicitly support x86_64, PPC64 and x86_32.
If it's one of them, we proceed "normally". If we fail to detect the arch,
we fallback to 64-bit scanning, unless the user has passed either of these
option switches: "--opt-
Hey, Merry Xmas all !! :-)
Re inline below,
Updated patch to follow..
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 16:57:46 +1100
"Tobin C. Harding" wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 09:24:47AM +0530, kaiwan.billimo...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> > The script attempts to detect the architecture it's running upon;
> > as of n
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 09:24:47AM +0530, kaiwan.billimo...@gmail.com wrote:
> The script attempts to detect the architecture it's running upon; as of now,
> we explicitly support x86_64, PPC64 and x86_32.
> If it's one of them, we proceed "normally". If we fail to detect the arch,
> we fallback to
The script attempts to detect the architecture it's running upon; as of now,
we explicitly support x86_64, PPC64 and x86_32.
If it's one of them, we proceed "normally". If we fail to detect the arch,
we fallback to 64-bit scanning, unless the user has passed either of these
option switches: "--32-b
5 matches
Mail list logo